August 16th, 2009, 06:07 AM
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class A
{
public:
int a;
A() : a(1234) {};
};
August 15th, 2009, 07:05 PM
Oh the smily was a random pick, didnt realize it means mad-avatar!!!
If there is a reason to have two foo classes, it probably means, they are
two different flavors of something.
Say class...
August 15th, 2009, 06:45 PM
well the point is the specific constructs in c++ questioned may have been designed
better(or even left out). I want to know if I am wrong, if I am where? This forum is
for such open discussions...
August 15th, 2009, 06:04 PM
1. Why could C++ have not disabled a default copy constructor and why shouldnt it have demanded a
explicit copy constructor, if such a use case of the class exist, it would have avoided...