析构函数的可能范围 [英] Possible scopes of a destructor

问题描述

大家好，
$ c $ b我的c ++考试我回答说destructors可能被宣布为私有，

公共或受保护。

这个问题是：

析构函数有哪些可能的范围（公共或私人）？


我得到0这个答案，他们纠正我析构函数只能是
public。

当我用私有析构函数和朋友函数显示代码时

创建/销毁对象他们告诉我，我没有正确使用它，

我不称之为析构函数等....


所以，什么析构函数可能包含的范围是什么？


thans

解决方案

" __ PPS __" < I - ********* @ yandex.ru>在消息中写道

news：11 ********************* @ g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com ...

大家好，
在我的c ++考试中我回答说，析构函数可能被宣告为私有，公开或受保护。
问题是：可能的范围（公共或私人）
析构函数可以吗？

我得到了0这个答案，他们纠正了我，析构函数只能是公开的。


你是对的，他们错了。但我建议不要使用

而不是'公共'，除非你真的真的知道

你在做什么，并且非常好原因。
当我用私人析构函数和朋友函数显示代码创建/销毁对象时，他们告诉我我没有正确使用它，


如果没有看到代码，我就不能发表评论。

我不称之为析构函数等....

所以，析构函数可能具有哪些范围？

上面列举的那些。


-Mike

文章< 11 ********************* @ g44g2000cwa.googlegroups。 com>，

__PPS__< i - ********* @ yandex.ru>写道：

大家好，
在我的c ++考试中我回答说，析构函数可能被宣告为私有，
公开或受保护。
问题是：什么可能的范围（公共或私人）可以使用
析构函数吗？

我得到0这个答案，他们纠正了我，析构函数只能公开。

当我用私有析构函数和朋友函数显示代码创建/销毁对象时，他们告诉我我没有正确使用它，
我不称之为析构函数等等....

那么，析构函数可能具有哪些范围？

因为问题是关于* scope *正确答案

是课程范围。


然而，听起来你的问题是关于辅助功能，

即*访问*。在这种情况下，通常你不希望它，但是确保dtor可以是私人的。当然，没有正确使用东西的情况并不总是与可能的情况相同。

如果你想在这里批评你的私人代码，感觉

免费发布，与此同时，给你

考试的人显然使用了错误的术语。

-

Greg Comeau /庆祝20年的Comeauity！

Comeau C / C ++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout

世界级编译器：令人惊叹的C ++，惊人的C99，很棒的C90。

Comeau C / C ++与Dinkumware的库...你试过吗？

" Mike Wahler" < MK ****** @ mkwahler.net>在消息中写道

新闻：Hh ************** @ newsread2.news.pas.earthlink .net ...

__ PPS __ < I - ********* @ yandex.ru>在消息中写道
新闻：11 ********************* @ g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com ...

你好大家好，在我的c ++考试中我回答说，破坏者可能被宣布为私有，公开或受保护。
问题是：有什么可能的范围（公共或私人）可以析取器有吗？"

我得到0这个答案，他们纠正了我，析构函数只能是公开的。

你' 对了，他们错了。

但格雷格比我们任何一个人都更正确。 :-)


我忽略了滥用术语

他注意到了。


-Mike

Hello everybody,
in my exam in c++ I answered that destructors may be declared private,
public or protected.
The question was: "What possible scopes (public or private) can a
destructor have?"

I got 0 for this answer, they corrected me that destructor can only be
public.

When I showed the code with private destructor and friend functions
that create/destroy object they told me that I don''t use it correctly,
that I don''t call destructor etc etc....

So, what are the possible scopes destructors may have?

thans

解决方案

"__PPS__" <i-*********@yandex.ru> wrote in message
news:11*********************@g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...

Hello everybody,
in my exam in c++ I answered that destructors may be declared private,
public or protected.
The question was: "What possible scopes (public or private) can a
destructor have?"

I got 0 for this answer, they corrected me that destructor can only be
public.
You''re right, they''re wrong. But I''d advise against using
other than a ''public'' one unless You Really Really Know
What You''re Doing, and have a very good reason.
When I showed the code with private destructor and friend functions
that create/destroy object they told me that I don''t use it correctly,
I can''t comment on that without seeing the code.
that I don''t call destructor etc etc....

So, what are the possible scopes destructors may have?

Those you enumerated above.

-Mike

In article <11*********************@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups. com>,
__PPS__ <i-*********@yandex.ru> wrote:

Hello everybody,
in my exam in c++ I answered that destructors may be declared private,
public or protected.
The question was: "What possible scopes (public or private) can a
destructor have?"

I got 0 for this answer, they corrected me that destructor can only be
public.

When I showed the code with private destructor and friend functions
that create/destroy object they told me that I don''t use it correctly,
that I don''t call destructor etc etc....

So, what are the possible scopes destructors may have?

Since the question asked about *scope* the correct answer
is "class scope".

However, it sounds like your question was about accessibility,
that is *access*. In that case, usually you don''t want it to be,
but sure a dtor can be private. Of course, the case of not
using something properly is not always the same as if it''s possible.
If you want a critique of your private dtor code here, feel
free to post it, in the meantime, the person giving you the
exam has apparently used wrong terminology.
--
Greg Comeau / Celebrating 20 years of Comeauity!
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware''s Libraries... Have you tried it?

"Mike Wahler" <mk******@mkwahler.net> wrote in message
news:Hh**************@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink .net...

"__PPS__" <i-*********@yandex.ru> wrote in message
news:11*********************@g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...

Hello everybody,
in my exam in c++ I answered that destructors may be declared private,
public or protected.
The question was: "What possible scopes (public or private) can a
destructor have?"

I got 0 for this answer, they corrected me that destructor can only be
public.

You''re right, they''re wrong.

But Greg is more right than either of us. :-)

I overlooked that misuse of terminology that
he noted.

-Mike

这篇关于析构函数的可能范围的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！