Re: deep copy or shallow copy?

From:

Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Tue, 22 Jul 2014 16:37:18 -0400

Message-ID:

<lqmi1v$t91$1@dont-email.me>

On 7/22/2014 4:28 PM, CHIN Dihedral wrote:

On Thursday, June 26, 2014 12:48:13 PM UTC+8, Juha Nieminen wrote:

mbalover2014@gmail.com wrote:

memcpy(&a1,&a2,sizeof(A));

I'm curious to know why you would even *want* to do that when you can

simply do a2=a1.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

Well, how about assigning an object
of a muti-inheritance subclass to
an objet of its parrent class.

What's a "parrent class"? Which one of {A,B} here:

class B {}; class A : B {};

is the "parrent"?

Conversion from an object of the derived type to any of its
*unambiguous* base classes is well defined in C++ (and is a standard
conversion). Does it present a problem to you? Or are you talking
about a conversion from a base class to a derived class?

The headaques created by C++'s
design in the language outweighted
its advance in teaching OOP.

Have you taught OOP using C++? Or have you been taught OOP using C++?

V
--
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask