Re: [Algorithms] C++ inherited constructors

[Matt A. <de...@gm...>]

This wouldn't solve the problem : When I create an instance of CThread ( or
if one is created by using containment )
the constructor is also called and therefore a new thread is created which I
dont want.
Yes and I don't want to create the instance by malloc() but by new or by
containment, which automatically call the constructor.
Anyway, since there's no way to suppress the constructor call, I chose a
workaround.
Aesthetic is not everything :)
Thanks for all the answers to this topic,
Matt

----- Original Message -----
From: Will Portnoy <wi...@cs...>
To: <gda...@li...>
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] C++ inherited constructors


> I don't completely understand your problem, but it might be solvable by
> using containment rather than inheritance, i.e. a process *has* a thread
> rather than *is* a thread.  I think it would allow for the semantics you
> want.  You could pass in an external thread for the process/main loop to
> "have" through a constructor argument, or you could just have the
> process/main loop create a thread through it's default argumentless
> constructor.
>
> The same goes with your main loop class: it has a thread, not is a
> thread.
>
> It's an idea, anyway. :)
>
> Will
>
> ----
> Will Portnoy
> http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/will
>
> On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Matt Adams wrote:
>
> > I need this for aesthetic reasons :)
> > I've got an abstract CThread class. If a want to create a new thread, I
> > build my process class and inherit CThread, which creates a new thread
by
> > construction.
> > Now I want my main-threadloop-class to inherit CThread, too, to provide
all
> > the thread functionality to my main thread. But that thread already
exists
> >  created by compiler ), and shouldn't be created again by CThread.
> > Of course I can put CThread () and ~CThread () in functions like
Create()
> > and Destroy() and leave the constructor / destructor empty. But it'd be
> > nicer if it could be done in another way...
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Favnir
> > To: gda...@li...
> > Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 1:32 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Algorithms] C++ inherited constructors
> >
> > The only way you can do this is to define a (preferably) protected
> > do-nothing constructor for the base class, and inherit it in the
subclass
> > constructor.
> >
> > But, why in the world would you need to do this, in the first place?
> >
> > Are,
> > F
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Matt Adams
> > To: gda...@li...
> > Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 12:22 PM
> > Subject: [Algorithms] C++ inherited constructors
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I got a question about the C++ class hierarchy.
> >
> > class a
> > {
> >     a () {...}; // constr a
> > };
> >
> > class b : a
> > {
> >     b () {...}; // constr b
> > };
> >
> > b instance;
> >
> > When creating an instance of b, constructors for both class a and class
b
> > are called.
> > Is there a way to suppress the automatic calling of constructor a ?
> > Or something like 'overloading' the old constructor by a new one ?
> > I couldn't find anything like that in the compiler docs.
> >
> > Any help appreciated,
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> > GDA...@li...
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> > GDA...@li...
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>