Thread: a class in a struct?

Basically what you are doing is calling the constructor for dice and you don't need to.

Are you sure about that? As I recall from some book somewhere (I'm sure everyone knows what book I'm talking about ), struct is 99% the same as class except that things are public by default, so it actually looks to me like your declaring a function called dice() that returns a diceClass.

Are you sure about that?

Damn your right. Its not a constructor call.I'm not sure what my compiler is seeing it as but it sure isn't a class. Will the compiler see it as a function that takes an unknown number of arguments? The only good thing is that when you try to use it, it will fail. I tried this code:

Code:

#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

class barClass
{
   public:
      void hello()
      {  cout<<"Hello. This is a test.\n";   }
};

struct Foo
{
   public:
      barClass bClass();
};

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
   Foo fooFoo;

   fooFoo.bClass.hello();

   return(0);
}

and got the compiler error telling me:

error C2228: left of '.hello' must have class/struct/union type

So it looks like you are right Hunter2. I though that declaring a function without any arguments is only allowed in C.

I though that declaring a function without any arguments is only allowed in C.

Now how this might happen, I'm not sure Unless you mean "int function(void);". If you want to declare an object of barClass, you simply go "barClass bClass;" and it will automatically use the default constructor (i.e. the one that has no arguments), unless the Foo constructor explicitly initializes it using one of the constructors that takes arguments. Example:

Code:

Foo::Foo()
:bClass(theArgumentYouWantToUse)
{
    //do something
}

Now how this might happen, I'm not sure Unless you mean "int function(void);

No I mean int function() or are you telling me that a function with no arguments specified defaults to void in c++?(Just as an added note, VC++ sees it as void).I just want this cleared up so I know what the standard is for function prototypes in c++ because right now I am under the impression that all functions have to specify an argument even if it is void.


I did some searching and found out that in C
int function( );
is deemed to take an unknown number of arguments.(from the FAQ on this site) But this same statement is interpreted in C++ as a prototype equivalent to the following:
int function(void );
Guess thats what happens when you always prototype functions. I had forgotten all about that but there it was in black and white in one of my c++ programming books.

C does (or at least did) have that convention, where
int f( ) is unknown number of args
int f(...) is the C++ equivalent

In C++,
int f( ) and
int f(void)
are the same.

Really? I didn't know that. I always thought that not specifying any arguments meant just zero arguments for both languages... I learn something new every day

Looks like we both did. I always thought that in c++ all function arguments had to be specified, even if the dont' take any.