Search Results

Search found 45348 results on 1814 pages for 'immutable class'.

Page 8/1814 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • ctags doesn't work when class is defined like "class Gem::SystemExitException"

    - by dan
    You can define a class in a namespace like this class Gem class SystemExitException end end or class Gem::SystemExitException end When code uses first method of class definition, ctags indexes the class definition like this: SystemExitException test_class.rb /^ class SystemExitException$/;" c class:Gem With the second way, ctags indexes it like this: Gem rubygems/exceptions.rb /^class Gem::SystemExitException < SystemExit$/;" c The problem with the second way is that you can't put your cursor (in vim) over a reference to "Gem::SystemExitException" and have that jump straight to the class definition. Your only recourse is to page through all the (110!) class definitions that start with "Gem::" and find the one you're looking for. Does anyone know of a workaround? Maybe I should report this to the maintainer of ctags?

    Read the article

  • Why do pure virtual base classes get direct access to static data members while derived instances do

    - by Shamster
    I've created a simple pair of classes. One is pure virtual with a static data member, and the other is derived from the base, as follows: #include <iostream> template <class T> class Base { public: Base (const T _member) { member = _member; } static T member; virtual void Print () const = 0; }; template <class T> T Base<T>::member; template <class T> void Base<T>::Print () const { std::cout << "Base: " << member << std::endl; } template <class T> class Derived : public Base<T> { public: Derived (const T _member) : Base<T>(_member) { } virtual void Print () const { std::cout << "Derived: " << this->member << std::endl; } }; I've found from this relationship that when I need access to the static data member in the base class, I can call it with direct access as if it were a regular, non-static class member. i.e. - the Base::Print() method does not require a this- modifier. However, the derived class does require the this-member indirect access syntax. I don't understand why this is. Both class methods are accessing the same static data, so why does the derived class need further specification? A simple call to test it is: int main () { Derived<double> dd (7.0); dd.Print(); return 0; } which prints the expected "Derived: 7"

    Read the article

  • Class Plugins in PHP?

    - by YuriKolovsky
    i just got some more questions while learning PHP, does php implement any built in plugin system? so the plugin would be able to change the behavior of the core component. for example something like this works: include 'core.class.php'; include 'plugin1.class.php'; include 'plugin2.class.php'; new plugin2; where core.class.php contains class core { public function coremethod1(){ echo 'coremethod1'; } public function coremethod2(){ echo 'coremethod2'; } } plugin1.class.php contains class plugin1 extends core { public function coremethod1(){ echo 'plugin1method1'; } } plugin2.class.php contains class plugin2 extends plugin1 { public function coremethod2(){ echo 'plugin2method2'; } } This would be ideal, if not for the problem that now the plugins are dependable on each other, and removing one of the plugins: include 'core.class.php'; //include 'plugin1.class.php'; include 'plugin2.class.php'; new plugin2; breaks the whole thing... are there any proper methods to doing this? if there are not, them i might consider moving to a different langauge that supports this... thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Interface vs Abstract Class (general OO)

    - by Kave
    Hi, I have had recently two telephone interviews where I've been asked about the differences between an Interface and an Abstract class. I have explained every aspect of them I could think of, but it seems they are waiting for me to mention something specific, and I dont know what it is. From my experience I think the following is true, if i am missing a major point please let me know: Interface: Every single Method declared in an Interface will have to be implemented in the subclass. Only Events, Delegates, Properties (C#) and Methods can exist in a Interface. A class can implement multiple Interfaces. Abstract Class Only Abstract methods have to be implemented by the subclass. An Abstract class can have normal methods with implementations. Abstract class can also have class variables beside Events, Delegates, Properties and Methods. A class can only implement one abstract class only due non-existence of Multi-inheritance in C#. 1) After all that the interviewer came up with the question What if you had an Abstract class with only abstract methods, how would that be different from an interface? I didnt know the answer but I think its the inheritance as mentioned above right? 2) An another interviewer asked me what if you had a Public variable inside the interface, how would that be different than in Abstract Class? I insisted you can't have a public variable inside an interface. I didn't know what he wanted to hear but he wasn't satisfied either. Many Thanks for clarification, Kave See Also: When to use an interface instead of an abstract class and vice versa Interfaces vs. Abstract Classes How do you decide between using an Abstract Class and an Interface?

    Read the article

  • PHP Access property of a class from within a class instantiated in the original class.

    - by Iain
    I'm not certain how to explain this with the correct terms so maybe an example is the best method... $master = new MasterClass(); $master->doStuff(); class MasterClass { var $a; var $b; var $c; var $eventProccer; function MasterClass() { $this->a = 1; $this->eventProccer = new EventProcess(); } function printCurrent() { echo '<br>'.$this->a.'<br>'; } function doStuff() { $this->printCurrent(); $this->eventProccer->DoSomething(); $this->printCurrent(); } } class EventProcess { function EventProcess() {} function DoSomething() { // trying to access and change the parent class' a,b,c properties } } My problem is i'm not certain how to access the properties of the MasterClass from within the EventProcess-DoSomething() method? I would need to access, perform operations on and update the properties. The a,b,c properties will be quite large arrays and the DoSomething() method would be called many times during the execuction of the script. Any help or pointers would be much appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • DataAnnotation attributes buddy class strangeness - ASP.NET MVC

    - by JK
    Given this POCO class that was automatically generated by an EntityFramework T4 template (has not and can not be manually edited in any way): public partial class Customer { [Required] [StringLength(20, ErrorMessage = "Customer Number - Please enter no more than 20 characters.")] [DisplayName("Customer Number")] public virtual string CustomerNumber { get;set; } [Required] [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "ACNumber - Please enter no more than 10 characters.")] [DisplayName("ACNumber")] public virtual string ACNumber{ get;set; } } Note that "ACNumber" is a badly named database field, so the autogenerator is unable to generate the correct display name and error message which should be "Account Number". So we manually create this buddy class to add custom attributes that could not be automatically generated: [MetadataType(typeof(CustomerAnnotations))] public partial class Customer { } public class CustomerAnnotations { [NumberCode] // This line does not work public virtual string CustomerNumber { get;set; } [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "Account Number - Please enter no more than 10 characters.")] [DisplayName("Account Number")] public virtual string ACNumber { get;set; } } Where [NumberCode] is a simple regex based attribute that allows only digits and hyphens: [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property)] public class NumberCodeAttribute: RegularExpressionAttribute { private const string REGX = @"^[0-9-]+$"; public NumberCodeAttribute() : base(REGX) { } } NOW, when I load the page, the DisplayName attribute works correctly - it shows the display name from the buddy class not the generated class. The StringLength attribute does not work correctly - it shows the error message from the generated class ("ACNumber" instead of "Account Number"). BUT the [NumberCode] attribute in the buddy class does not even get applied to the AccountNumber property: foreach (ValidationAttribute attrib in prop.Attributes.OfType<ValidationAttribute>()) { // This collection correctly contains all the [Required], [StringLength] attributes // BUT does not contain the [NumberCode] attribute ApplyValidation(generator, attrib); } Why does the prop.Attributes.OfType<ValidationAttribute>() collection not contain the [NumberCode] attribute? NumberCode inherits RegularExpressionAttribute which inherits ValidationAttribute so it should be there. If I manually move the [NumberCode] attribute to the autogenerated class, then it is included in the prop.Attributes.OfType<ValidationAttribute>() collection. So what I don't understand is why this particular attribute does not work in when in the buddy class, when other attributes in the buddy class do work. And why this attribute works in the autogenerated class, but not in the buddy. Any ideas? Also why does DisplayName get overriden by the buddy, when StringLength does not?

    Read the article

  • Why and when should I make a class 'static'? What is the purpose of 'static' keyword on classes?

    - by Saeed Neamati
    The static keyword on a member in many languages mean that you shouldn't create an instance of that class to be able to have access to that member. However, I don't see any justification to make an entire class static. Why and when should I make a class static? What benefits do I get from making a class static? I mean, after declaring a static class, one should still declare all members which he/she wants to have access to without instantiation, as static too. This means that for example, Math class could be declared normal (not static), without affecting how developers code. In other words, making a class static or normal is kind of transparent to developers.

    Read the article

  • Java Design Questions - Class, Function, Access Modifiers

    - by Ron
    I am newbie to Java. I have some design questions. Say I have a crawler application, that does the following: 1. Crawls a url and gets its content 2. Parses the contents 3. Displays the contents How do you decide between implementing a function or a class? -- Should the parser be a function of the crawler class, or should it be a class in itself, so it can be used by other applications as well? -- If it should be a class, should it be protected or public class? How do you decide between implementing a public or protected class? -- If I had to create a class to generate stats from the parsed contents for eg, should that class be protected (so only the crawler class can access it) or should it be public? Thanks Ron

    Read the article

  • How can I load class's part using linq to sql without anonymous class or additional class?

    - by ais
    class Test { int Id{get;set;} string Name {get;set;} string Description {get;set;} } //1)ok context.Tests.Select(t => new {t.Id, t.Name}).ToList().Select(t => new Test{Id = t.Id, Name = t.Name}); //2)ok class TestPart{ int Id{get;set;} string Name {get;set;} } context.Tests.Select(t => new TestPart{Id = t.Id, Name = t.Name}).ToList().Select(t => new Test{Id = t.Id, Name = t.Name}); //3)error Explicit construction of entity type 'Test' in query is not allowed. context.Tests.Select(t => new Test{Id = t.Id, Name = t.Name}).ToList(); Is there any way to use third variant?

    Read the article

  • question about class derivation in c++?

    - by jack22
    hi, i want to know some things about class derivation in c++ so i have super class x and an inherited class y and i did this class x{ public:a; private:b; protected:c; } class y:public x{ public:d; } in this case how y can access a,b,and c and by how i mean(public,protected,private) the second case: class x{ public:a; private:b; protected:c; } class y:private x{ public:d; } the same question? the third case: class x{ public:a; private:b; protected:c; } class y:private x{ public:d; } again the same question? sorry i think i wrote too much bye

    Read the article

  • how can we call one class's method through another class's object in php

    - by hello
    I want to know that is there any method in PHP by which i can call one class's method from another class object. let me clear here is one class class A() { public function showData(){ //here is method of class A } } // here is another class class B(){ public function getData(){ //some method in class B } } //now i create two objects $objA= new class A(); $objB=new class B(); now i want to call this $objB->showData();<--- is that possible .. by any how method( using public, inheritence,child parent etc...) please help me

    Read the article

  • JQuery: loop through elements with more than one css class name that share only the first class name

    - by omaether
    Hello, I'm trying to use JQuery to loop through several div's with more than one class name, that all have the same first css class name and each one has a different second class name, e.g. <div class="maintext blue"> </div> <div class="maintext purple"> </div> <div class="maintext chartreuse"> </div> <div class="maintext puce"> </div> <div class="maintext lime"> </div> In JQuery I have tried $(".mainText").each(function (i) $(".mainText.*").each(function (i) $(".mainText" *).each(function (i) $(".mainText .*").each(function (i) But it will not select any of the divs with class="mainText ..." thanks for considering the question.

    Read the article

  • Give a reference to a python instance attribute at class definition

    - by Guenther Jehle
    I have a class with attributes which have a reference to another attribute of this class. See class Device, value1 and value2 holding a reference to interface: class Interface(object): def __init__(self): self.port=None class Value(object): def __init__(self, interface, name): self.interface=interface self.name=name def get(self): return "Getting Value \"%s\" with interface \"%s\""%(self.name, self.interface.port) class Device(object): interface=Interface() value1=Value(interface, name="value1") value2=Value(interface, name="value2") def __init__(self, port): self.interface.port=port if __name__=="__main__": d1=Device("Foo") print d1.value1.get() # >>> Getting Value "value1" with interface "Foo" d2=Device("Bar") print d2.value1.get() # >>> Getting Value "value1" with interface "Bar" print d1.value1.get() # >>> Getting Value "value1" with interface "Bar" The last print is wrong, cause d1 should have the interface "Foo". I know whats going wrong: The line interface=Interface() line is executed, when the class definition is parsed (once). So every Device class has the same instance of interface. I could change the Device class to: class Device(object): interface=Interface() value1=Value(interface, name="value1") value2=Value(interface, name="value2") def __init__(self, port): self.interface=Interface() self.interface.port=port So this is also not working: The values still have the reference to the original interface instance and the self.interface is just another instance... The output now is: >>> Getting Value "value1" with interface "None" >>> Getting Value "value1" with interface "None" >>> Getting Value "value1" with interface "None" So how could I solve this the pythonic way? I could setup a function in the Device class to look for attributes with type Value and reassign them the new interface. Isn't this a common problem with a typical solution for it? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Which is the better C# class design for dealing with read+write versus readonly

    - by DanM
    I'm contemplating two different class designs for handling a situation where some repositories are read-only while others are read-write. (I don't foresee any need to a write-only repository.) Class Design 1 -- provide all functionality in a base class, then expose applicable functionality publicly in sub classes public abstract class RepositoryBase { protected virtual void SelectBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void InsertBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void UpdateBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void DeleteBase() { // implementation... } } public class ReadOnlyRepository : RepositoryBase { public void Select() { SelectBase(); } } public class ReadWriteRepository : RepositoryBase { public void Select() { SelectBase(); } public void Insert() { InsertBase(); } public void Update() { UpdateBase(); } public void Delete() { DeleteBase(); } } Class Design 2 - read-write class inherits from read-only class public class ReadOnlyRepository { public void Select() { // implementation... } } public class ReadWriteRepository : ReadOnlyRepository { public void Insert() { // implementation... } public void Update() { // implementation... } public void Delete() { // implementation... } } Is one of these designs clearly stronger than the other? If so, which one and why? P.S. If this sounds like a homework question, it's not, but feel free to use it as one if you want :)

    Read the article

  • Request for advice about class design, inheritance/aggregation

    - by Lasse V. Karlsen
    I have started writing my own WebDAV server class in .NET, and the first class I'm starting with is a WebDAVListener class, modelled after how the HttpListener class works. Since I don't want to reimplement the core http protocol handling, I will use HttpListener for all its worth, and thus I have a question. What would the suggested way be to handle this: Implement all the methods and properties found inside HttpListener, just changing the class types where it matters (ie. the GetContext + EndGetContext methods would return a different class for WebDAV contexts), and storing and using a HttpListener object internally Construct WebDAVListener by passing it a HttpListener class to use? Create a wrapper for HttpListener with an interface, and constrct WebDAVListener by passing it an object implementing this interface? If going the route of passing a HttpListener (disguised or otherwise) to the WebDAVListener, would you expose the underlying listener object through a property, or would you expect the program that used the class to keep a reference to the underlying HttpListener? Also, in this case, would you expose some of the methods of HttpListener through the WebDAVListener, like Start and Stop, or would you again expect the program that used it to keep the HttpListener reference around for all those things? My initial reaction tells me that I want a combination. For one thing, I would like my WebDAVListener class to look like a complete implementation, hiding the fact that there is a HttpListener object beneath it. On the other hand, I would like to build unit-tests without actually spinning up a networked server, so some kind of mocking ability would be nice to have as well, which suggests I would like the interface-wrapper way. One way I could solve this would be this: public WebDAVListener() : WebDAVListener(new HttpListenerWrapper()) { } public WebDAVListener(IHttpListenerWrapper listener) { } And then I would implement all the methods of HttpListener (at least all those that makes sense) in my own class, by mostly just chaining the call to the underlying HttpListener object. What do you think? Final question: If I go the way of the interface, assuming the interface maps 1-to-1 onto the HttpListener class, and written just to add support for mocking, is such an interface called a wrapper or an adapter?

    Read the article

  • Get information from a higher class?

    - by Clint Davis
    I don't know really how to word the question so please bear with me... I have 3 classes: Server, Database, and Table. Each class has a "Name" property. How I want it to work is that each server can have multiple databases and each database can have multiple tables. So in the Server class I have this property. Private _databases As List(Of Database) Public Property Databases() As List(Of Database) Get Return _databases End Get Set(ByVal value As List(Of Database)) _databases = value End Set End Property And I have something similar in the Database class for the tables. This works fine now because I can do something like this to get all the databases in the server. For Each db In s.Databases 's being the server object Debug.Print(db.Name) Next I would like to expand these classes. I want the server class to handle all the connection information and I would like the other classes to use the server class's connection information in them. For example, I setup a server class and set the connection string to the server. Then I want the database class to use serverclass.connectionstring property to connect to the server and get a list of all the databases. But I want to keep that code in the database class. How can I do this? I've attached some code of what I want to do. Public Class Server Private _name As String Public Property Name() As String Get Return _name End Get Set(ByVal value As String) _name = value End Set End Property Private _databases As List(Of Database) Public Property Databases() As List(Of Database) Get Return _databases End Get Set(ByVal value As List(Of Database)) _databases = value End Set End Property End Class '-----New class Public Class Database Private _name As String Public Property Name() As String Get Return _name End Get Set(ByVal value As String) _name = value End Set End Property Private _tables As List(Of Table) Public Property Tables() As List(Of Table) Get Return _tables End Get Set(ByVal value As List(Of Table)) _tables = value End Set End Property 'This is where I need help! Private Sub LoadTables () dim connectionstring as string = server.connectionstring 'Possible? 'Do database stuff End Class Thanks for reading!

    Read the article

  • Is it legal to extend the Class class?

    - by spiralganglion
    I've been writing a system that generates some templates, and then generates some objects based on those templates. I had the idea that the templates could be extensions of the Class class, but that resulted in some magnificent errors: VerifyError: Error #1107: The ABC data is corrupt, attempt to read out of bounds. What I'm wondering is if subclassing Class is even possible, if there is perhaps some case where doing this would be appropriate, and not just a gross misuse of OOP. I believe it should be possible, as ActionScript allows you to create variables of the Class type. This use is described in the LiveDocs entry for Class, yet I've seen no mentions of subclassing Class. Here's a pseudocode example: class Foo extends Class var a:Foo = new Foo(); trace(a is Class) // true, right? var b = new a(); I have no idea what the type of b would be. In summary: can you subclass the Class class? If so, how can you do it without errors, and what type are the instances of the instances of the Class subclass?

    Read the article

  • Function returning a class containing a function returning a class

    - by Scott
    I'm working on an object-oriented Excel add-in to retrieve information from our ERP system's database. Here is an example of a function call: itemDescription = Macola.Item("12345").Description Macola is an instance of a class which takes care of database access. Item() is a function of the Macola class which returns an instance of an ItemMaster class. Description() is a function of the ItemMaster class. This is all working correctly. Items can be be stored in more than one location, so my next step is to do this: quantityOnHand = Macola.Item("12345").Location("A1").QuantityOnHand Location() is a function of the ItemMaster class which returns an instance of the ItemLocation class (well, in theory anyway). QuantityOnHand() is a function of the ItemLocation class. But for some reason, the ItemLocation class is not even being intialized. Public Function Location(inventoryLocation As String) As ItemLocation Set Location = New ItemLocation Location.Item = item_no Location.Code = inventoryLocation End Function In the above sample, the variable item_no is a member variable of the ItemMaster class. Oddly enough, I can successfully instantiate the ItemLocation class outside of the ItemMaster class in a non-class module. Dim test As New ItemLocation test.Item = "12345" test.Code = "A1" quantityOnHand = test.QuantityOnHand Is there some way to make this work the way I want? I'm trying to keep the API as simple as possible. So that it only takes one line of code to retrieve a value.

    Read the article

  • The purpose of using a constants pool for immutable constants

    - by patstuart
    Originally posted at stackoverflow.com/q/23961260 I come across the following code with a lot of frequency: if (myArray.length == Constants.ZERO_INT) or if (myString != null && !myString.equals(Constants.EMPTY_STRING)) Neither of these makes much sense to me. Isn't the point of having a constant pool for ease of code appearance and to allow for modularity? In both of the above cases, it just looks like needless noise that accomplishes neither objective. My question: what is the purpose of using a constants pool for variables like this which will never change? Or is this just cargo cult programming? If so, then why does it seem to be prevalent in the industry? (I've noticed it with at least two different employers I've worked with).

    Read the article

  • Gathering IP address and workstation information; does it belong in a state class?

    - by p.campbell
    I'm writing an enterprisey utility that collects exception information and writes to the Windows Event Log, sends an email, etc. This utility class will be used by all applications in the corporation: web, BizTalk, Windows Services, etc. Currently this class: holds state given to it via public properties calls out to .NET Framework methods to gather information about runtime details. Included are call to various properties and methods from System.Environment, Reflection details, etc. This implementation has the benefit of allowing all those callers not to have to make these same calls themselves. This means less code for the caller to forget, screw up, etc. Should this state class (please what's the phrase I'm looking for [like DTO]?) know how to resolve/determine runtime details (like the IP address and machine name that it's running on)? It seems to me on second thought that it's meant to be a class that should hold state, and not know how to call out to the .NET Framework to find information. var myEx = new AppProblem{MachineName="Riker"}; //Will get "Riker 10.0.0.1" from property MachineLongDesc Console.WriteLine("full machine details: " + myEx.MachineLongDesc); public class AppProblem { public string MachineName{get;set;} public string MachineLongDesc{ get{ if(string.IsNullOrEmpty(this.MachineName) { this.MachineName = Environment.MachineName; } return this.MachineName + " " + GetCurrentIP(); } } private string GetCurrentIP() { return System.Net.Dns.GetHostEntry(this.MachineName) .AddressList.First().ToString(); } } This code was written by hand from memory, and presented for simplicity, trying to illustrate the concept.

    Read the article

  • class __init__ (not instance __init__)

    - by wallacoloo
    Here's a very simple example of what I'm trying to get around: class Test(object): some_dict = {Test: True} The problem is that I cannot refer to Test while it's still being defined Normally, I'd just do this: class Test(object): def __init__(self): self.__class__.some_dict = {Test: True} But I never create an instance of this class. It's really just a container to hold a group of related functions and data (I have several of these classes, and I pass around references to them, so it is necessary for Test to be it's own class) So my question is, how could I refer to Test while it's being defined, or is there something similar to __init__ that get's called as soon as the class is defined? If possible, I want self.some_dict = {Test: True} to remain inside the class definition. This is the only way I know how to do this so far: class Test(object): @classmethod def class_init(cls): cls.some_dict = {Test: True} Test.class_init()

    Read the article

  • Derive abstract class from non-abstract class

    - by Jehof
    Is it OK to derive an abstract class from a non-abstract class or is there something wrong with this approach? Here´s a little example: public class Task { // Some Members } public abstract class PeriodicalTask : Task { // Represents a base class for task that has to be done periodicaly. // Some additional Members } public class DailyTask : PeriodicalTask { // Represents a Task that has to be done daily. // Some additional Members } public class WeeklyTask : PeriodicalTask { // Represents a Task that has to be done weekly. // Some additional Members } In the example above i do not want to make the class Task abstract, because i want to instantiate it directly. PeriodicalTask should inherit the functionality from Task and add some additional members but i do not want to instantiate it directly. Only derived class of PeriodicalTask should be instantiated.

    Read the article

  • Java - abstract class, equals(), and two subclasses

    - by msr
    Hello, I have an abstract class named Xpto and two subclasses that extend it named Person and Car. I have also a class named Test with main() and a method foo() that verifies if two persons or cars (or any object of a class that extends Xpto) are equals. Thus, I redefined equals() in both Person and Car classes. Two persons are equal when they have the same name and two cars are equal when they have the same registration. However, when I call foo() in the Test class I always get "false". I understand why: the equals() is not redefined in Xpto abstract class. So... how can I compare two persons or cars (or any object of a class that extends Xpto) in that foo() method? In summary, this is the code I have: public abstract class Xpto { } public class Person extends Xpto{ protected String name; public Person(String name){ this.name = name; } public boolean equals(Person p){ System.out.println("Person equals()?"); return this.name.compareTo(p.name) == 0 ? true : false; } } public class Car extends Xpto{ protected String registration; public Car(String registration){ this.registration = registration; } public boolean equals(Car car){ System.out.println("Car equals()?"); return this.registration.compareTo(car.registration) == 0 ? true : false; } } public class Teste { public static void foo(Xpto xpto1, Xpto xpto2){ if(xpto1.equals(xpto2)) System.out.println("xpto1.equals(xpto2) -> true"); else System.out.println("xpto1.equals(xpto2) -> false"); } public static void main(String argv[]){ Car c1 = new Car("ABC"); Car c2 = new Car("DEF"); Person p1 = new Person("Manel"); Person p2 = new Person("Manel"); foo(p1,p2); } }

    Read the article

  • VIrtual class problem

    - by ugur
    What i think about virtual class is, if a derived class has a public base, let's say, class base, then a pointer to derived can be assigned to a variable of type pointer to base without use of any explicit type conversion. But what if, we are inside of base class then how can we call derived class's functions. I will give an example: class Graph{ public: Graph(string); virtual bool addEdge(string,string); } class Direct:public Graph{ public: Direct(string); bool addEdge(string,string); } Direct::Direct(string filename):Graph(filename){}; When i call constructor of Direct class then it calls Graph. Now lets think Graph function calls addedge. Graph(string str){ addedge(str,str); } When it calls addedge, even if the function is virtual, it calls Graph::edge. What i want is, to call Direct::addedge. How can it be done?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >