| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Comments:
<0> peterhu: How could my explanations be any clearer? the only code i have in my ctor is this->init()
<0> that is a pure virtual method
<0> somehow it is trying to look for the init() in the base cl*** and generates a link time error
<1> mozai you cannot guarantee the vtable is set up yet
<1> what you have is a bad idea
<0> why then when I create a baseInit() method that calls this->init() and call that baseInit() from the base ctor, it works?
<1> IMO a bug in the compler
<1> think about what you're trying to do
<1> you're trying to call a method in a derived cl*** (which, in principle, can depend that the base is entirely constructed) before you've constructed the base
<2> this would, like i said, be made much clearer by code
<1> base::base()(this->init();)
<1> is that clear enough now
<2> and init's on base?
<1> cl*** base(public: virtual init() = 0;
<1> worse, it's pure virtual
<2> heere's another question: what are you trying to do, mozai?
<0> peter: do some init proper to each child cl***. instead of calling init() from evert ctor of children cl***
<1> why don't you just put it in the constructor of each child cl***?
<1> i.e. why do you have an init() in each cl*** anyhow?
<0> i can, but isn't that redundant? I mean, i know that i will be calling init().
<0> hmm...i think then that the compiler has a bug letting me compile the version with the ctor calling a baseInit(). If the base cl*** gets initialized before the drived cl***, then it shouldn't allow me to call any non static member of my derived cl***.
<0> I will test to see what happens. I am curious to know how will the rutime deal with that
<1> <1> IMO a bug in the compler
<1> mozai it doesn't matter how the runtime deals with it
<1> on your current compiler it may do what you want (that's one of the definitions of "undefined")
<3> I thought undefined was "works in testing, works in production, doesn't work when the CEO demos it"
<0> lol
<3> nevermind you said "one"
<0> vaw: As excpected, I get a runtime error...makes sens
<0> "R6025 - Pure virtual function call"
<0> "The error occurs when you indirectly call a pure virtual function within the context of a call to the constructor or destructor of an abstract base cl***. This is illustrated in the sample code below, along with some more description. "
<1> mozai the real problem is that behavior is undefined... you're lucky your runtime caught it
<1> what compiler are you using?
<0> VS2005
<1> debug build?
<0> yes
<1> great, I guess they do a lot of testing I was unaware of
<2> mozai, see the standard 12.7 paragraph 3.
<4> did he post code yet?
<0> where can I find it?
<4> are you calling virtual functions in a constructor? that's what it sounded like
<1> that's what he was trying to do
<0> rdragon:yes, we got that issue resolved
<0> peterhu: is the C++ standard freely available?
<5> man, rdragon
<5> jill's been telling us some funny stories about you.
<6> m - he lies
<2> 12.7/3 says that when a virtual function is called directly or indirectly from a constructor or destructor, and the object it applies to is still under construction/destruction, the function called is the one defined in the constructor/destructor's own cl*** or a base
<2> mozai, i believe there's a draft copy available for download
<0> ok, i will try and find it
<1> mozai it's not only the standard that goes into what's happening during construction / destruction
<5> m?
<5> you know _m_ too?
<6> No
<6> it's weird to call rdragon rdragon
<5> why?
<5> it's what we call him.
<5> when he's here anyway.
<1> that's what he claimed to want to be called
<6> because when i know someone in real life i don't call them by their irc name in person or on the phone
<2> i call him bitch
<6> so it's just weird ok
<6> lol peter
<5> so, his real name is m?
<7> heh i call him bitch that's good
<2> yeah, he's james bond's boss
<6> yep
<5> wasn't m an old woman?
<7> quick question just for reference are graphics made in the same way as in c# or vb as far as for c++?
<8> Only in the newest films.
<6> why do you torment me
<2> judy dench, yeah
<1> dame judy dench
<7> as far as using the built in stuff to draw/display stuff
<2> jazy84, if you're using directx 9, you would use COM rather than the managed wrappers, but it's quite similar
<9> hmm?
<2> if you're talking GDI, then it's similar if you use GDI+
<7> yeah GDI
<7> thanks for the info peterhu
<2> _m_ your spam bot kick is broken
<9> is it still?
<6> indeed - peter is still here
<2> zpfft
<6> your spam bot doesn't work
<7> hah
<10> Is that how you say "you're welcome?"
<10> ah
<5> Well, we've gotta torment someone
<6> noidea gave me 10 seconds of glorius power today and i didn't get to abuse it
<5> I mean, I've got 3 more hours of work.
<6> next time, there will be no hesitation
<10> I thought that was JaZy84
<10> heh
<9> peterhu: it's not broken. The bots changed their naming patterns.
<7> clsk: :(
<2> haha
<2> how?
<9> Apparently, there were some with a lowercase letter as first character.
<6> all the ones today were uppercase
<6> Isabel28
<2> thought you just checked for ending with number (you should probably keep allow 70+; wtf wants spam from a 70+ year old chick)
<6> Natalie13
<6> Aretina28
<9> whatever, it should work again now.
<6> peter's favourite was Lolita24
<9> This box got rebooted, and the kick script isn't autorun.
<6> haha
<2> looks good
<6> tina got op'd
<6> then owned
<2> hah
<6> peter you missed it
<9> However, I fixed that some time ago.
<6> [16:46] <6> peter's favourite was Lolita24
<9> I don't kick ops, btw.
<2> lolita24, isn't that an oxymoron?
<6> yes it's more like Lolita09
<7> oh geesh
<2> wasn't she like 14 in the book?
<6> m you op'd tina then kicked her
<9> jill_s: that were overlapping activities.
<6> unacceptable
<9> IRC isn't perfectly synced.
<6> wow look at the excuses
<6> ;)
<9> Otherwise, it would be way too slow.
<7> _m_ talking = excuses :)
<9> Anyway, it's good we got rid of Tina :P
<6> agreed peter can do that **** somewhere else
<7> i have the same XXXX## :/
<6> haha
<6> hahaha
<2> WANT TO SEE MY HOT CAM?!
<7> :/
<9> Your CAM is hot?
<6> www.underamicroscope.com peter?
<7> i should've just shut up
<2> indeed
<2> OH ME SO HORNY
<6> :o
<2> that's not true, bitchx gave me herpes
<6> you're supposed to put it on before
<2> oh
<6> i'm so bored at work
<6> 9 minutes GO
<6> oh snap 8
<6> yes!
<1> jill_s you're on the east coast, eh?
<2> you can't leave until 5 pm?
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
#linux
#linux
#AllNiteCafe
#MissKitten
senin anan bacn yok mu
#java
#skype
vrckoo
#asm
#mirc
|
|