Re: Question about heritance and other aspects.
"Lorry Astra" <LorryAstra@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:41571945-5DC8-434E-97A5-A7BCE7125DA5@microsoft.com
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class B
{
public:
int i;
B()
{}
};
class A
{
public:
A(B& b1)
{
b1.i=0;
}
};
class C : public A
{
B b;
public:
C() : A(b)
{}
};
As the code above, b is a private object for class C. Why I can
revise b as a reference in constructor of class A.
Accessibility controls access to names, not to objects. The same object
can be referred to by many different names or expressions (known as
aliasing), some of which may be public, others private, and still others
not members at all.
In your example, the name C::b is private to class C. But the name b1 (a
parameter of A's constructor) is not a data member of any class, and is
certainly accessible inside the body of the constructor. The constructor
doesn't know nor care that the name refers to an object that happens to
be a private member of some class.
As I know, even class C herites from class A, A can not revise any
private properties in C, is that right?
A cannot look inside C and access its private members. But C can look
inside itself and give others access to its internals if it so chooses.
class A
{
public:
A()
{}
friend ostream& operator << (ostream& os,A& ac)
{}
};
If I remove keyword "friend", operator << will be seen as a bit
operator instead of a stream operator, why?
If you remove "friend" keyword in this case, the code won't even
compile. With the "friend" keyword, you declare a non-member function
(that happens to be a friend of the class). Without the keyword, the
same declaration would (attempt to) declare operator<< as a member
function of class A. But a member function form of operator<< must take
only one parameter, not two.
this description let me think about "class" in C++. Can I say: the
declaration of a "class" will not be stored in storage space?
Quite. Types don't occupy storage: objects do.
if what
I said is right, how C++ compiler deals with inline function
Formally, functions are not objects, and C++ language doesn't place any
requirements on how they are represented in memory (if at all). In
practice, of course, code occupies some memory - whether it resides in
an inline member function, non-inline member function, nor a non-member
function (inline or otherwise).
--
With best wishes,
Igor Tandetnik
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to
land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly
overhead. -- RFC 1925