Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!tellab5!balr!gill!paul
From: paul@gill.UUCP (Paul Nordstrom)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Constructor question
Message-ID: <1278@gill.UUCP>
Date: 23 Apr 91 16:14:05 GMT
References: <1991Apr2.110623.22219@and.cs.liv.ac.uk> <20164@alice.att.com> <17400@sunquest.UUCP> <20204@alice.att.com>
Organization: Gill & Co., L.P., San Francisco
Lines: 44

In article <20204@alice.att.com> ark@alice.UUCP () writes:
>In article <17400@sunquest.UUCP> francis@sunquest.UUCP (Francis Sullivan) writes:
>> ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig) writes:
>
>> >In article <1991Apr2.110623.22219@and.cs.liv.ac.uk> markr@and.cs.liv.ac.uk writes:
>
>> >> Can I call one constructor to class X explicitly from within another
>> >> constructor to class X ?
>
>> >No.
>
>> Yes, by using operator=
>
>Sorry, but still no.
>
>The usage you propose is implicitly (not explicitly) calling the constructor
>to construct a *different* object.
>
>The original question was whether it was possible for one constructor
>of a class to call another constructor to help it construct the
>same object; the answer to that question is `no.'
>-- 
>				--Andrew Koenig
>				  ark@europa.att.com

I'm sure I'm missing something, but why does the following not imply an
affirmative answer to markr's question?

X::X()
{
  new (this) X(1);	// use some other constructor ...
}

X::X(int j)
{
  // some other constructor
}


-- 
--
Paul Nordstrom
Gill & Co., L.P.
uunet!gill!paul