From: "Edmund Horner" <ejrh AT paradise DOT net DOT nz>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
References: <39e9f547_4 AT spamkiller DOT newsfeeds DOT com> <971687834 DOT 987432 AT shelley DOT paradise DOT net DOT nz> <mtpmusgvgu1tl3f7jdr8rp9c176ka9rgko AT 4ax DOT com>
Subject: Re: destroy_bitmap in destructor
Lines: 28
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Organization: Paradise Net
Message-ID: <971754996.30708@shelley.paradise.net.nz>
Cache-Post-Path: shelley.paradise.net.nz!unknown AT 203-79-65-99 DOT tnt8 DOT paradise DOT net DOT nz
X-Cache: nntpcache 2.4.0b5 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 16:57:19 +1300
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.96.152.26
X-Complaints-To: newsadmin AT xtra DOT co DOT nz
X-Trace: news.xtra.co.nz 971754997 203.96.152.26 (Tue, 17 Oct 2000 16:56:37 NZDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 16:56:37 NZDT
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Apologies.  You are technically correct on both issues.

However, I think that source code has to be human-readable as well as
compiler-readable.  And for me, that means using C-compatible features (such
as structs) the same way one uses them in C.

Regarding initialisation lists; this was something I was never taught in
C++.  How interesting.

Edmund.

> >Since this is quite a complicated struct (constructors, functions, et.
al.),
> >would it not be better calling it a class?
>
> In C++, class == struct except for the default access level of fields
> and methods.
>   http://www.cpuniverse.com/archives/1999/mar/c++.html

> >What this tells me is that your struct is descended from classes x, y,
and
> >life, and you are calling those constructors!
>
> Not necessarily.  See also
>   http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/0400/c/c0400.asp