redefine a non-virtual function in C++
When I read Effective C++, it says, never redefine a non-virtual function in C++.
However, when I tested it, the code below compiles correctly. So what's the point? It's a mistake or just a bad practice?
class A {
public:
void f() { cout<<"a.f()"<<endl;};
};
class B: public A {
public:
void f()开发者_如何转开发 { cout<<"b.f()"<<endl;};
};
int main(){
B *b = new B();
b->f();
return 0;
}
Redefining a non-virtual function is fine so long as you aren't depending on virtual dispatch behavior.
The author of the book is afraid that you will pass your B*
to a function that takes an A*
and then be upset when the the result is a call to the base method, not the derived method.
Try this:
int main(){
A *b = new B();
b->f();
return 0;
}
I think the answer will be obvious once you see the result ;-).
Without being virtual, the late-binding mechanism will not be used, hence the function that is defined for that pointer type will be used, not late-binded function that you want to call. This leads to tons of badly trackable bugs.
Hence, what you are doing is creating a new function. It may be what you intended, but someone reading your code afterwards might expect the above code to work with late-binding. Very confusing.
One of the features I really wanted to see is a warning in such a case, with a "redefine" keyword to prevent it, but dreams are dreams, and reality is reality -_-
The point is that if you, for instance, have a list of pointers to the base class (List<A *> list
) and then call f()
, the re-implemented method in B
will not be called.
精彩评论