Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!rutgers!princeton!allegra!alice!bs
From: bs@alice.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Address of constructor?
Message-ID: <6438@alice.uUCp>
Date: Sun, 7-Dec-86 22:16:34 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.6438
Posted: Sun Dec  7 22:16:34 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 8-Dec-86 03:26:44 EST
References: <165700002@uiucdcsb>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
Lines: 20
Summary: you cannot take it

Kevin Kenny writes

> In working over the material of the previous posting, removing any
> references to overloaded functions, I discovered that I couldn't find
> a syntax that cfront would accept for taking the address of a
> constructor.  I want to do this because I am in a situation where I
> have allocated memory by another means that I want to initialize as an
> instance of a class, so I want to pass it to the constructor as
> ``this''.  The reason why is complicated; suffice it to say that I am
> dealing with a situation where I can't rewrite the constructor and
> have to use a memory allocator other than the standard _new operator.

That sounds messy - and no, there is no way of taking the address of a
constructor, if you must play games with allocation and initialization
that separates the two you will have to do something like providing a
separate ``init()'' function and pass the address of it. If you cannot
even do that I think you will have to avoid user-defined allocation.

Similarly for destructors.