Article View: comp.std.c++
Article #1626Re: Why not A::A(something) : A(other) {} ?
From: Tom Breton
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 1995 20:25
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 1995 20:25
11 lines
848 bytes
848 bytes
vandevod@ro.cs.rpi.edu (David Vandevoorde) writes:
> Except for the initializer-list, I don't see how factoring out the
> common construction adds significant overhead:
"Factoring out" is usually proposed as a work-around, but it's not
really a solution. 0) It can't initialize reference or const members. 1)
Conceptually, it's just wrong. A member function should do stuff after
construction, not before construction. Construction should come from
ctors.
Tom
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<DCwops.HEo@world.std.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!in2.uu.net!world!tobReferences:
<3vu8ve$e6h@usenet.rpi.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!in2.uu.net!world!tob
From: tob@world.std.com (Tom Breton)
Subject: Re: Why not A::A(something) : A(other) {} ?
Message-ID: <DCwops.HEo@world.std.com>
Reply-To: tob@world.std.com
Organization: BREnterprises
References: <3vu8ve$e6h@usenet.rpi.edu>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 1995 20:25:04 GMT
X-Posted-By: My own casual posting program