Re: Problems with constructor return types

["Tony Lawrie (freenet)" <tonl at freenet dot co dot uk>]

Hi, 

The initial problem has been sorted (omitted a ";" at the end of the
class block, thanks Eljay), but as I mentioned to Eljay, after that, I
kept getting a undefined reference to vtable in the constructor
definition in the .cpp file. 2 lines saying:

a) constructor was in charge
b) constructor was not in charge

Now, if I cut the constructor definition from the .cpp file and paste it
(as is) into the header file it compiles without any problem. Don't
understand what's wrong here...why will it compile/run when in the
header and not in the .cpp file? (note: the header file is included in
the .cpp implementation  i.e. #include "header.h") 

Tony. 
  

On Sun, 2003-10-12 at 17:13, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> Eljay Love-Jensen wrote:
> > Hi Tony,
> > 
> > C++ default constructors are...
> > 
> > Foo::Foo() { ... }
> > 
> > ...not...
> > 
> > Foo::Foo(void) { ... }
> Those two definitions are equivalent in C++. [8.3.5]/2
> 
> > 
> > Also, 0.00 is type double, 0.00f is type float.
> correct, but it will not cause a problem in this instance.
> 
> There is insufficient information in Tony's original email to determine
> what the problem is.
> 
> -- 
> Nathan Sidwell    ::   http://www.codesourcery.com   ::     CodeSourcery LLC
>           The voices in my head said this was stupid too
> nathan@codesourcery.com    ::     http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
> 
>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part