🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3vtd09$83f@usenet.rpi.edu>, Lance Page <page@cat.rpi.edu> wrote:
>
>I propose that a constructor for a class A be allowed to invoke another
>constructor of A in place of its base class & member initializers.
>e.g.:
>
>class A {
>  A(other);
>  A(something) : A(other) {}                        
>  ...
>};
>
[...]
>Anyway... "why not?".
>
>-Lance Page

Except for the initializer-list, I don't see how factoring out the
common construction adds significant overhead:

	struct A {
	    A("other"): "init_list" { ... construct(common); ... }
            A("something"): "init_list" { ... construct("common"); ... }
            // ...
        private:
            void construct("common") ...
            // ...
        };

The initializer list must be repeated, but I think that is rarely
a problem, is it?

	Daveed