Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!sharkey!rjf001!hpftc!zardoz!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!usc!ginosko!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!dptg!ulysses!andante!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: use of new
Message-ID: <9788@alice.UUCP>
Date: 17 Aug 89 16:30:20 GMT
References: <2276@cadillac.CAD.MCC.COM>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ
Lines: 17

In article <2276@cadillac.CAD.MCC.COM>, vaughan@puma.cad.mcc.com (Paul Vaughan) writes:

> 	Why is a complete class definition required for the use of the
> new operator?  Example:

> class foo;
> 
> void bar() {
>   new foo;
> }

If the compiler hasn't seen the class definition for foo, it doesn't
know if `new foo' is legal.  The foo class might not have an empty
constructor defined...
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com