Prev: GCC (G++) "#if x1 == x2" bug
Next: Perl-like qx// in C++ ?
From: Florian on 9 Jul 2010 23:06
> Defining the constructor in the class declaration causes (requests) it to be
> "inlined", such that code for the function doesn't normally get inserted into
> your compiler's object code except at the point where it's called--but it's
> not called from anywhere in your example and so no code is generated; the
> linker never sees it. (Of course, if the compiler opts to not inline the
> ctor afterall, then you would see the linker error in both of your examples.)

I think it's wrong.

struct A
{
A();
virtual void foo() {}
};

A::A() {foo();}

These don't lead to linker error.

@Daniel Kr�gler: Are you sure it's a UB ? Il could make unexpected
behavior in inherited class because in constructor of base class, type
is base never derived, so it isn't call the expected function, but it
isn't undefined.


--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: GCC (G++) "#if x1 == x2" bug
Next: Perl-like qx// in C++ ?