Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!kodak!ektools!randolph
From: randolph@ektools.UUCP (Gary L. Randolph)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: pointers to methods
Message-ID: <2435@ektools.UUCP>
Date: 12 Feb 90 16:14:22 GMT
References: <3063@pur-phy>
Sender: randolph@ektools (Gary L. Randolph)
Reply-To: randolph@ektools.UUCP (Gary L. Randolph)
Organization: Eastman Kodak, Dept. 47, Rochester NY
Lines: 40

In article <3063@pur-phy> sho@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu.UUCP (Sho Kuwamoto) writes:
*I'm not up on 2.0 (did Stroustrup come out with a book yet?  I haven't

He is doing his best to meet this year's deadline.

*been paying much attention to this group lately) but is there any
*standard way you can get a pointer to a member function?  How does it
*work?  I want something like this:
*  funcPtr = className::func;
*  instance->funcPtr(arg1, arg2);

Not a problem.  
The definition of funcPtr will look like:

   retType (className::*funcPtr)(argType, argType);

Then the actual call:

   instance->*funcPtr(arg1,arg2);

This is documented in Lippman, pg. 213 and in 1988 USENIX proceedings
pg. 305.

*Now for the big finale.  I'd like something like this, but one which works
*for virtual functions.

Also possible. See USENIX '88 referenced above.

*TaDaa!  Another pipe dream.  This would give me more faith that C++
*was an object oriented programming language, with messages being
*passed around, so forth.  As it is now, I can't shake the feeling that
*it's just a big program that mangles names for you. 
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It is, if you don't know how to use it.

   Gary

These views are mine and are not meant to represent views of the Eastman 
Kodak Company.