Can We make Virtual Contructors?

[codergem]

Hello Freinds
Is it possible to define a Virtual constructor?
if yes then how?
and if no , then how?
thanks

 

[Howard]

Hello Freinds
Is it possible to define a Virtual constructor?
if yes then how?
and if no , then how?

If no, then how??? Um, by NOT doing it?

thanks

Check the FAQ:

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/virtual-functions.html#faq-20.8

You might want to read the whole FAQ. It's very helpful.

-Howard

 

[Frederick Gotham]

(e-mail address removed) posted:

Is it possible to define a Virtual constructor?

No.


if yes then how?

Non-applicable.


and if no , then how?

How can something NOT be done?

Is this one of those "tree falling in the woods" questions?

 

[Mark P]

(e-mail address removed) posted:



How can something NOT be done?

Easy, you do anything but that thing.

 

[Alf P. Steinbach]

* (e-mail address removed):

Hello Freinds
Is it possible to define a Virtual constructor?

Use e.g. Google to look up the hundreds of previous threads on that topic.

Short answer: if you mean the idiom "virtual constructor", yes (and see
the FAQ); if you mean can you declare a C++ constructor as "virtual", no
(see your textbook); if you mean can we sensibly extend the language to
allow that, yes, in more than one way (see clc++m discussions of that).

if yes then how?
and if no , then how?

See above.

 

[Dennis Jones]

Easy, you do anything but that thing.

Or, even easier...do nothing.

- Dennis

 

[Duane Hebert]

How can something NOT be done?

Is this one of those "tree falling in the woods" questions?

Yep. Sort of like flying by throwing yourself
at the ground and missing.