dynamic types,

[vsgdp]

Does it make sense to talk about dynamic/static types with pointers in an
inheritance chain without virtual functions. You can still upcast/downcast.
Also, is it safe to say the static type is the pointer type you specify at
compile time, and the dynamic type is the type actualy pointed to---they may
be the same in the case A* a = new A();

 

[Alf P. Steinbach]

* vsgdp:

Does it make sense to talk about dynamic/static types with pointers in an
inheritance chain without virtual functions.
Yes.


Also, is it safe to say the static type is the pointer type you specify at
compile time, and the dynamic type is the type actualy pointed to---they may
be the same in the case A* a = new A();

In general it's not safe to discuss terminology.

 

[vsgdp]

* vsgdp:

In general it's not safe to discuss terminology.

What do you mean? Static and dynamic type are not well defined terms?

 

[Andrew Koenig]

Does it make sense to talk about dynamic/static types with pointers in an
inheritance chain without virtual functions. You can still
upcast/downcast.

Yes it does. Consider:

struct A { };
struct B : A { };

A* p = new B;
delete p; // undefined behavior

The statement "delete p;" has undefined behavior because the static type of
*p differs from its dynamic type and struct A doesn't have a virtual
destructor. If it didn't make sense for me to talk about static and dynamic
types in this context, how would I explain why "delete p;" has undefined
behavior?