something wrong when i compile my own struct

[remlostime]

struct lineType
{
int x, y;
lineType(int tx, int ty)
{
if (tx == 0)
{
ty = 1 << 20;
tx = 1;
}
x = tx;
y = ty;
}
};
lineType line[30000];

when i compile it
error: no matching function for call to `lineType::line Type()
why?

[manish sahu]

Re: something wrong when i compile my own struct

On Feb 13, 8:17 pm, remlostime <remlost...@gma il.comwrote:

struct lineType
{
  int x, y;
  lineType(int tx, int ty)
  {
    if (tx == 0)
    {
      ty = 1 << 20;
      tx = 1;
    }
    x = tx;
    y = ty;
  }};
>
lineType line[30000];
>
when i compile it
error: no matching function for call to `lineType::line Type()
why?

hey its a wrong method because u give a same name to structure and
compiler gets confused and we cannot have a constructor in c

[red floyd]

Re: something wrong when i compile my own struct

manish sahu wrote:

On Feb 13, 8:17 pm, remlostime <remlost...@gma il.comwrote:

>struct lineType
>{
> int x, y;
> lineType(int tx, int ty)
> {
> if (tx == 0)
> {
> ty = 1 << 20;
> tx = 1;
> }
> x = tx;
> y = ty;
> }};
>>
>lineType line[30000];
>>
>when i compile it
>error: no matching function for call to `lineType::line Type()
>why?

>
hey its a wrong method because u give a same name to structure and
compiler gets confused and we cannot have a constructor in c

So? It's C++. As has already been pointed out, the issue is that there
is no default constructor.

[Ron Natalie]

Re: something wrong when i compile my own struct

Kira Yamato wrote:

Neat. I thought you need an actual default constructor, i.e., one that
takes no argument.
>

Yep, the definition of a default constructor is not one with no args,
but one that can be called with no args. Similarly a copy constructor
is defined when you have the first arg of T& or const T& and any
additional args are defaulted.

[Kira Yamato]

Re: something wrong when i compile my own struct

On 2008-02-14 08:49:01 -0500, Ron Natalie <ron@spamcop.ne tsaid:

Kira Yamato wrote:
>

>Neat. I thought you need an actual default constructor, i.e., one that
>takes no argument.
>>

Yep, the definition of a default constructor is not one with no args,
but one that can be called with no args. Similarly a copy constructor
is defined when you have the first arg of T& or const T& and any
additional args are defaulted.

Ooo. Double neat. :)

--

// kira