destructors

[vaividhya@gmail.com]

Q1:Can we call a destructor explicitly?If yes ,give example?
Q2:What is difference between extensibility and inheritence?

[osmium]

Re: destructors

<vaividhya@gmai l.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Q2:What is difference between extensibility and inheritence?[/color]

Extensibility is a word that belongs in a marketing presentation, like
modular, efficacious and all that crap. I don't think it has any defensible
technical meaning.

[Victor Bazarov]

Re: destructors

vaividhya@gmail .com wrote:[color=blue]
> Q1:Can we call a destructor explicitly?If yes ,give example?
> Q2:What is difference between extensibility and inheritence?
>[/color]

Homework is for doing it yourself. What books do you use to study?

[Victor Bazarov]

Re: destructors

osmium wrote:[color=blue]
> <vaividhya@gmai l.com> wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>Q2:What is difference between extensibility and inheritence?[/color]
>
>
> Extensibility is a word that belongs in a marketing presentation, like
> modular, efficacious and all that crap. I don't think it has any defensible
> technical meaning.[/color]

I don't agree, but I don't think that discussion on this is beneficial to
the OP. He/she needs to get a couple of good books and spend some time
with them. Of course, the first book seems to be the dictionary, since
the question asked is similar to "what is [the] difference between
literacy and learning?"


V
--
Please remove capital As from my address when replying by mail

[Phlip]

Re: destructors

osmium wrote:
[color=blue]
> Extensibility is a word that belongs in a marketing presentation, like
> modular, efficacious and all that crap. I don't think it has any
> defensible technical meaning.[/color]

A professor may have hearkened to the "Opened Closed Principle".

I would answer "Inheritanc e is a physical mechanism, and extension is a
logical technique. Inheritence may enable extension, as may generics,
pointers, configuration tables, etc."

The OP should not answer that, for reasons I hope are obvious. ;-)

--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.org/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!

[Victor Bazarov]

Re: destructors

Phlip wrote:[color=blue]
> osmium wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>Extensibili ty is a word that belongs in a marketing presentation, like
>>modular, efficacious and all that crap. I don't think it has any
>>defensible technical meaning.[/color]
>
>
> A professor may have hearkened to the "Opened Closed Principle".
>
> I would answer "Inheritanc e is a physical mechanism, and extension is a[/color]

Is it just me or do some people see what they like to see and not what
is actually written? "Extensibil ity" is what the question is about, not
"extension" . It doesn't change the fact that the question can't be
answered, but still... I do hope we don't need to discuss the difference
between "extension" and "extensibility" ... <g>
[color=blue]
> [...][/color]

V
--
Please remove capital As from my address when replying by mail

[mlimber]

Re: destructors

vaividhya@gmail .com wrote:[color=blue]
> Q1:Can we call a destructor explicitly?If yes ,give example?[/color]

See the FAQ:

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/dtors.html#faq-11.11

Cheers! --M

[Ravi Nakidi]

Re: destructors

Hi Vaividhya,

Yeah, you can call destructor explicitly. Ultimately, destructor is
used free memory or do something the work left by object of that
class. I mean clean of operations.

For example, you created a pointer object of the class within the
memberfunction of the class. say

A *obj;

obj = new A();

--
---
---
--
--
This allocated memory can't be destroyed until unless program ends.
In this case U can call destructor explicitly in order to free the
memory.

In this case Destructor is like this.

~A()
{
delete this
}

this is very very important in case of larger projects other wise it
yields memory problem.


Coming 2 second question:

extensibility is nothing but containership

It is like this

Adding some features to the class

A
|
B

Here from B to A.

Where as in Inheritance A to B. Understand

Regards,
Ravi Nakidi

[Diego Martins]

Re: destructors

yeah! it is very good when someone solves our homework, huh? :-)

Ravi Nakidi wrote:[color=blue]
> Hi Vaividhya,
>
> Yeah, you can call destructor explicitly. Ultimately, destructor is
> used free memory or do something the work left by object of that
> class. I mean clean of operations.
>
> For example, you created a pointer object of the class within the
> memberfunction of the class. say
>
> A *obj;
>
> obj = new A();
>
> --
> ---
> ---
> --
> --
> This allocated memory can't be destroyed until unless program ends.
> In this case U can call destructor explicitly in order to free the
> memory.
>
> In this case Destructor is like this.
>
> ~A()
> {
> delete this
> }
>
> this is very very important in case of larger projects other wise it
> yields memory problem.
>
>
> Coming 2 second question:
>
> extensibility is nothing but containership
>
> It is like this
>
> Adding some features to the class
>
> A
> |
> B
>
> Here from B to A.
>
> Where as in Inheritance A to B. Understand
>
> Regards,
> Ravi Nakidi[/color]