Thread: Explicit and Virtual, just out of curiosity

One of the things I like in C/C++ is that... it makes sense. For the most part (mind you the disclaimer) keywords and language constructs are obvious in the way they are used and why they are used in that particular way.

I don't actually expect an answer to this question. Probably there isn't one. But I grew accustomed to believe that almost everything in C/C++ is done in a certain way for a very good reason. And so here it is one of the things that has been nagging me for a long time:

Why can't we use virtual and explicit also on function definitions, but only on their declarations? Really, now....

Nope. No access to the book as of yet. I've spent a few hundred dollars in books already. A very... damaging effort, I should say. The last, just a couple of days ago in a duty-free bookshop in Heathrow airport (Josuttis' C++ Standard Library). But confessedly, that book is not in my list of priorities for the moment

Hmm. I believe that it is because only keywords which modify the signature of the function itself are allowed (and required) at the definition.

It would be illegal to have two functions which differed only by virtual/nonvirtual, for example. It's not illegal to have functions which differ, for example, only by const:

Code:

class x{
    void function() const{
        std::cout << "Const!" << std::endl;
    }
    void function() {
        std::cout << "Not Const!" << std::endl;
    }
};