On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 03:35:52 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 02:39:22 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Is there any reason why constructors are not inherited? All
other methods are inherited, why not constructors?
They're not polymorphic, and it doesn't make sense to call a
base class constructor on a derived class. I think that I heard
somewhere that C++11 added some sort of constructor
inheritance, so maybe there's something we could do that would
make sense, but in general, I don't see how the concept makes
any sense at all. Construction is intimately tied to the type
being constructed. It's as non-generic as you can get.
- Jonathan M Davis
Their are plenty of examples where you would want a constructor
to be inherited, exceptions being a good one. Currently if you
have a base class with a constructor that you want all the sub
classes to have as well, you simply have to just copy past them
all over the place.
