Implement abstract class as a local class? pros and cons
Posted
by sinec
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by sinec
Published on 2010-03-17T14:08:25Z
Indexed on
2010/03/17
14:11 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 164
Hi,
for some reason I'm thinking on implementing interface within a some function(method) as local class.
Consider following:
class A{
public:
virtual void MethodToOverride() = 0;
};
A * GetPtrToAImplementation(){
class B : public A {
public:
B(){}
~B(){}
void MethodToOverride() {
//do something
}
};
return static_cast<A *>(new B());
}
int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
A * aInst = GetPtrToAImplementation();
aInst->MethodToOverride();
delete aInst;
return 0;
}
the reason why I'm doing this are:
- I'm lazy to implement class (B) in separate files
- MethodToOverride just delegates call to other class
- Class B shouldn't be visible to other users
- no need to worry about deleting aInst since smart pointers are used in real implementation
So my question is if I'm doing this right?
Thanks in advance!
© Stack Overflow or respective owner