Understanding Class Member Functions

psionl0 · 07-04-2013, 12:11 AM

Just to illustrate that C++ does not add to the functionality of C, here is an alternative way of extending structs and functions when dealing with pointers (ie when base_func is prototyped as void base_func(struct base_struct *b);):

Code:

struct extended_struct
{
   struct base_struct b;
   ... ... ... // extended bits
}

void extended_func(struct extended_struct *e)
{
   ... ... ...
   base_func(&(e->b));
   ... ... ...
}

ta0kira · 07-04-2013, 01:32 PM

Yes, there's a reason it was named C++. The real added value is automation of all of the messiness involved with alignment of base classes (especially virtual,) management of virtual functions, and templates. Those are all things the compiler takes care of, making it less likely that you'll make an error. Admittedly, those aren't runtime features, but not having preventable bugs is a runtime feature. You could, of course, also use asm instead of C.

Kevin Barry

psionl0 · 07-04-2013, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ta0kira

The real added value is automation of all of the messiness involved with alignment of base classes (especially virtual,) management of virtual functions, and templates.

That was pretty much my original point. This automatic class management reduces the scope for miscommunication between team members and makes it easier to adapt library classes to suit your needs.

Of course, a C programmer would not normally adopt an "everything is an object" mentality as above and would use more efficient coding mechanisms.

Sergei Steshenko · 07-05-2013, 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psionl0

...
Of course, a C programmer would not normally adopt an "everything is an object" mentality as above and would use more efficient coding mechanisms.

C++ is pretty far from this mentality. Or, pretty close

. In C++, according to the standard, in dumbed down form an object is a memory area. I am serious.

I rather prefer to see the world through everything is a function, and we sometimes need to store state paradigm.

psionl0 · 07-05-2013, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergei Steshenko

C++ is pretty far from this mentality. Or, pretty close

.

C++ is a little more flexible in how you approach a programming task.

Of course, even purely OOP languages like Java don't force you to think purely in terms of objects. For example, you wouldn't consider the java.lang.Math class to be an object but a set of mathematical functions.