0
Without a copy constructor the only way to copy an object would be to instantiate a new object (or use an existing object) and then assign another object's value to it. However, it would be very odd indeed to have a copy assignment operator without a matching copy constructor. If you have one, you must have both. If you do not need to copy an object of a particular class, however, you can simply delete both the copy constructor and the copy assigment operator for that class. Any attempt to copy or copy assign would then result in a compile-time error.
What else can I help you with?
Constructor cannot be virtual but destructor can be virtual justify?
bcoz constructor cant be invoked
What is the difference between the constructor to and destructor?
Functions and Constructors are similar in many ways. They can have arguments, they can have any amount of code, they can access the class's variables etc. the only difference is that a method in java needs to mandatorily have a return type but a Constructor in java cannot have a return type. It always creates and returns an object of the class for which it is the constructor. You cannot return a value from a constructor explicitly and if you try to do that, the compiler will give an error. The system knows that the purpose of the constructor is to create an object of the class and it will do the same irrespective of whether you declare a return type or not.
A method that is automatically called when an instance of a class is created?
The constructor of a class is automatically called when an instance of the class is created (using new in C++). The constructor method has the same name as the class that it is a part of. Constructors have no type and do not return anything. Similarly, the destructor is automatically called when the instance of the class is destroyed. The destructor is the same name as the class and is preceded by a tilde (~) For example: class Example { public: Example() // Constructor { printf("Object created\n"); } ~Example() // Destructor { printf("Object destroyed\n") } }; int main() { Example* x = new Example(); // Creates object, calls constructor delete x; // Calls destructor, deletes object return 0; }
Which class methods does the compiler generate automatically if you don't provide them explicitly?
Default constructor: X()Copy constructor: X(const X&)Copy assignment operator: X& operator=(const X&)Move constructor: X(X&&)Move assignment operator: X& operator=(XX&)Destructor: ~X()By default, the compiler will generate each of these operations if a program uses it. However, if the programmer declares any constructor for a class, the default constructor for that class is not generated. If the programmer declares a copy or move operation, no copy, move or destructor is generated. If the programmer declares a destructor, no move operation is generated (a copy constructor is generated for backward compatibility).We can also suppress generation of specific operations with the =delete pseudo-initialiser:class X {public:X (const X&) =delete; // suppress the compiler-generated copy operationsX& operator=(const X&) =delete;// ...};
Parameterized constructor in c plus plus?
Every class requires at least one constructor, the copy constructor. It is implied if not declared. If no constructors are declared, a default constructor is also implied. Every class also requires a destructor, which is also implied if not declared. The purpose of constructors is to construct the object (obviously) but by defining your own you can control how the object is constructed, and how member variables are initialised. By overloading constructors, you allow instances of your object to be constructed in several different ways. The copy constructor's default implementation performs a member-wise copy (a shallow-copy) of all the class members. If your class includes pointers, you will invariably need to provide your own copy constructor to ensure that memory is deep-copied. That is, you'll want to copy the memory being pointed at, not the pointers themselves (otherwise all copies end up pointing to the same memory, which could spell disaster when one of those instances is destroyed). The destructor allows you to tear-down your class in a controlled manner, including cleaning up any memory allocated to it. If your class includes pointers to allocated memory, you must remember to delete those pointers during destruction. The destructor is your last-chance to do so before the memory "leaks". The implied destructor will not do this for you -- you must implement one yourself. class foo { public: foo(){} // Default constructor. foo(const foo & f){} // Copy constructor. ~foo(){} // Destructor. };
Constructor cannot be virtual but destructor can be virtual justify?
bcoz constructor cant be invoked
Constructor and destructor invocation in c?
Not possible in C.
What is difference between constructor and destructor in net?
dono lah bodo
Why pointer of constructor is made but not of destructor?
When a constructor is invoked dynamically, the new operator allocates the required memory, initialises it according to the constructor, then returns a pointer to the allocation. The destructor is invoked by deleting the pointer. It wouldn't make any sense to return a pointer from a deletion.
How can you recognize a constructor in a class?
A class's constructor will have the same name of the class and no return type (not even void): class Example(){ Example() {printf("This is the constructor\n");} ~Example(){printf("This is the destructor\n");} };
What is the difference between the constructor to and destructor?
Functions and Constructors are similar in many ways. They can have arguments, they can have any amount of code, they can access the class's variables etc. the only difference is that a method in java needs to mandatorily have a return type but a Constructor in java cannot have a return type. It always creates and returns an object of the class for which it is the constructor. You cannot return a value from a constructor explicitly and if you try to do that, the compiler will give an error. The system knows that the purpose of the constructor is to create an object of the class and it will do the same irrespective of whether you declare a return type or not.
What is the order of constructors and destructors of object?
The order of constructors is determined by the sequence they are called in the code, starting with the base class constructor and moving to the derived class constructor. Destructors are called in the reverse order of constructors, starting with the derived class destructor and moving to the base class destructor.
A method that is automatically called when an instance of a class is created?
The constructor of a class is automatically called when an instance of the class is created (using new in C++). The constructor method has the same name as the class that it is a part of. Constructors have no type and do not return anything. Similarly, the destructor is automatically called when the instance of the class is destroyed. The destructor is the same name as the class and is preceded by a tilde (~) For example: class Example { public: Example() // Constructor { printf("Object created\n"); } ~Example() // Destructor { printf("Object destroyed\n") } }; int main() { Example* x = new Example(); // Creates object, calls constructor delete x; // Calls destructor, deletes object return 0; }
Which class methods does the compiler generate automatically if you don't provide them explicitly?
Default constructor: X()Copy constructor: X(const X&)Copy assignment operator: X& operator=(const X&)Move constructor: X(X&&)Move assignment operator: X& operator=(XX&)Destructor: ~X()By default, the compiler will generate each of these operations if a program uses it. However, if the programmer declares any constructor for a class, the default constructor for that class is not generated. If the programmer declares a copy or move operation, no copy, move or destructor is generated. If the programmer declares a destructor, no move operation is generated (a copy constructor is generated for backward compatibility).We can also suppress generation of specific operations with the =delete pseudo-initialiser:class X {public:X (const X&) =delete; // suppress the compiler-generated copy operationsX& operator=(const X&) =delete;// ...};
Why constructor and destructor cannot be made static?
The term "destructor" made me believe this question is related to .Net languages. A destructor is to destroy an instance of object. If it is available at static/class level, what is it going to destroy? The entire class, so the class no longer available? Thus, semantically, destructor should be an instance method. Constructor is on the opposite end of the life cycle of an instance. However, in .NET, a static constructor is allowed. Personally, I call this static constructor as a class initialization method. This method will be invoked by the .net framework only once when the class is loaded into the application domain. With the similar concept, there should be a "finalizer" of the class when the class is unloaded out of the application domain. But wait, does a class ever go out of the application domain once it's loaded? Yes, only at the termination of the application! Currently a class cannot be unloaded explicitly in codes and thus no point to have a static finalizer.
How do you construct a program with destructor more than constructors?
The question is unclear, but classes can only have one destructor at most. They can have as many constructors as required. Even if you do not declare any constructors, the compiler will automatically generate a default constructor (which initialises all member variables to zero) and a copy constructor (which performs a member-wise, shallow copy of the members). If your class contains member pointers and allocates memory to them, you must provide your own destructor to clean up those memory allocations as well as provide a copy constructor to deep copy the memory allocations (thus ensuring no two instances of the class point to the same memory).
Parameterized constructor in c plus plus?
Every class requires at least one constructor, the copy constructor. It is implied if not declared. If no constructors are declared, a default constructor is also implied. Every class also requires a destructor, which is also implied if not declared. The purpose of constructors is to construct the object (obviously) but by defining your own you can control how the object is constructed, and how member variables are initialised. By overloading constructors, you allow instances of your object to be constructed in several different ways. The copy constructor's default implementation performs a member-wise copy (a shallow-copy) of all the class members. If your class includes pointers, you will invariably need to provide your own copy constructor to ensure that memory is deep-copied. That is, you'll want to copy the memory being pointed at, not the pointers themselves (otherwise all copies end up pointing to the same memory, which could spell disaster when one of those instances is destroyed). The destructor allows you to tear-down your class in a controlled manner, including cleaning up any memory allocated to it. If your class includes pointers to allocated memory, you must remember to delete those pointers during destruction. The destructor is your last-chance to do so before the memory "leaks". The implied destructor will not do this for you -- you must implement one yourself. class foo { public: foo(){} // Default constructor. foo(const foo & f){} // Copy constructor. ~foo(){} // Destructor. };
