You do not have to use new to use polymorphism.Originally Posted by Tux0r
All you need is a pointer or reference to the base class. Thus this will work:
Furthermore, using delete this is something I would not recommend.Code:Derived a; Base* pa = &a; pa->myfunction(); // Or Base& ra = a; ra.myfunction();
If you don't want to do manual deleting, then use smart pointers.
Last edited by Elysia; 07-09-2009 at 12:37 PM.
Well that's a crap way to demonstrate polymorphism, since that's not polymorphic at all.
Imagine two classes to represent the time, TwelveHourClock and TwentyFourHourClock, related through the abstract data type Time, which at minimum specifies for its children a timestamp method. One way to dump the time for all the Time types is through a polymorphic function.
Code:void print (std::ostream& os, const Time& now) { os << "The time is " << now.timestamp() << '\n'; }
It was a way to demonstrate that you don't have to use new to use polymorphism.
But you didn't use polymorphism, so sorry if it's really my fault that you demonstrated so little.
Alright, perhaps it was a bad example. I realize that now... I used a single class.
Well, I edited it to use Derived and Base to demonstrate that we're talking about polymorphism.
I was not indicating this was the case.It will break broken usages of the facade pattern. There is nothing in the facade pattern that requires the facade to be a friend. Specifically, the facade pattern is not intended as a means of circumventing access control.
