Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!brahms.udel.edu!gdtltr
From: gdtltr@brahms.udel.edu (root@research.bdi.com (Systems Research Supervisor))
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Use of this in C++ compared to self in Smalltalk
Message-ID: <20525@brahms.udel.edu>
Date: 17 Apr 91 21:40:26 GMT
References: <0094742D.B7B638A0@uno.edu> <1991Apr17.175658.13334@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: Brain Dead Innovations, Inc. (BDI)
Lines: 32

In article <1991Apr17.175658.13334@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ml27192@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Lanett) writes:
=>jncs@uno.edu writes:
=>
=>>Example : can I write :
=>>		int C::foo (...)
=>>		 {
=>>			...
=>>		   this.message
=>>			...
=>>		 }
=>
=>>where "message" is a virtual function declared in class C.
=>
=>Yes, this and self are similar. Note that this is a pointer, so
=>the usage is this->message (); this is in fact optional: message ()
=>alone will work.

   Unless, of course, you do something stupid like making a local variable
which is also named "message". Then the "this" reference would be necessary
to force the scope into the class rather than the member function.

                                        Gary Duzan
                                        Time  Lord
                                    Third Regeneration



-- 
                            gdtltr@brahms.udel.edu
   _o_                      ----------------------                        _o_
 [|o o|]   Two CPU's are better than one; N CPU's would be real nice.   [|o o|]
  |_o_|           Disclaimer: I AM Brain Dead Innovations, Inc.          |_o_|