al@well.sf.ca.us (Alfred Fontes) (05/24/91)
Sometimes, I wish that the constructor for a base class didn't necessarily have to be called before the constructor for a derived class. Has the idea of not calling a base-class constructor been discussed before, and is there any expectation of seeing this in future versions of C++? Al Fontes, Jr. -- al@well.sf.ca.us -- -- uunet!apple!well!al --
pete@borland.com (Pete Becker) (05/29/91)
In article <25002@well.sf.ca.us> al@well.sf.ca.us (Alfred Fontes) writes: >Sometimes, I wish that the constructor for a base class didn't necessarily >have to be called before the constructor for a derived class. Has the idea >of not calling a base-class constructor been discussed before, and is there >any expectation of seeing this in future versions of C++? The fundamental assumption about classes in C++ is that you cannot access a class until it has been constructed. That's a trememdous aid to writing correct code! I agree that there are times when it would be handy to get around this rule, but I try to push such thoughts aside. The loss of object security would be too high a price.