On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 08:41:47PM +1000, Adam Nielsen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was expecting the following code snippet to work, so am I doing
> something wrong, or is there an issue with GCC? I was under the
> impression that this is allowed, according to
> http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/
ly as GCC should be able to tell at compile
> time the base constructor is calling a pure virtual function. I guess
> it's treating the constructor like any other function, where this
> behaviour would be permitted.
I think C++ allows for a definition for a purely abstract function
(which would be called in this case).
d a compiler error (something
along the lines of 'you can't call a pure virtual function') rather than
a linker error. Especially as GCC should be able to tell at compile
time the base constructor is calling a pure virtual function. I guess
it's treating the constructor like any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> I was under the
> impression that this is allowed, according to
> http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/strange-inheritance.html#faq-23.1
See [23.3]. You aren't allowed to call the virtual function from the Base class
constructor.
- --
Lion Vollnha
* Adam Nielsen:
> class Base {
> public:
> Base()
> {
> cout << "This is class " << this->number();
> }
>
> virtual int number() = 0;
> };
Roughly speaking, when number() is invoked, the object still has type
Base (with a corresponding vtable). One's constructor will chan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> It seems like GCC initially allows it as it starts to compile okay, but
> then I get an undefined reference error from the linker (because it
> seems to be actually calling Base::number(), which obviously won't work
> as it's a pure virtual function.
Hi all,
I was expecting the following code snippet to work, so am I doing
something wrong, or is there an issue with GCC? I was under the
impression that this is allowed, according to
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/strange-inheritance.html#faq-23.1
It seems like GCC initially allows it as
