-=>Quoting Darin Mcbride to Rene Herman <=-
DM>A quick paraphrase of my understanding of default constructor is
DM>one that does not require any explicit arguments. That is, if you
DM>can create an object of type foo as foo f, the constructor called
DM>is the default constructor.
Correct.
DM>Now, in practical terms, this means that there are two types of
DM>default constructors: - those with no actual arguments, and -
DM>those with all default arguments.
Incorrect.
There is only one default constructor - no arguments. It doesnt even
have to be specified in the source code. The compiler will create one
automatically. If all the default constructor does is create a simple
instance, then you don't even have to key it in.
Any other constructors (and there can me many of them) are simply
called "constructors".
DM>If the book is calling this an "instance", mentally switch it to
DM>"object".
..or variable, which is waht we called them in the 'old' days. [grin]
DM>I've found that, personally, terminology has made the switch to
DM>object orientation much easier to grasp. By realizing that this
DM>object encapsulates a real object (in this case, an abstract
DM>object that I mistakenly believe I understand ), I've made my
DM>switch to clean (I think ) OO code. Without the "right"
DM>terminology, technical people like ourselves could get confused
DM>both in understanding the concepts and how to apply them, but also
DM>in communicating with other technical people.
Groovy... [grin]
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------