Hello,
you may also want to explain what is the problem with having the
default constructor setting fA to zero... Otherwise it is not quite clear
what you're trying to fight
- regards, pasha
Alexander Yuryevich Zvyagin writes:
> Hi, ROOTers!
>
> I have one question about the role of default constructor for ROOT
> objects.
>
> In the class TMyClass I plan to use only one constructor:
>
> class TMyClass : public TObject
> {
> public:
> TMyClass(Int_t a);
> void Work(void);
> private:
> Int_t fA;
> ClassDef(TMyClass,1)
> };
>
> TMyClass::TMyClass(Int_t a)
> {
> // fA initialising ....
> ....
> }
>
> The function TMyClass::Work(void) will crash if fA is out of some legal
> range. It seems that everything is fine: TMyClass::TMyClass(Int_t) sets
> fA and TMyClass::Work(void) will work without problem. But in ROOT we must
> have default constructor too. Will it be save to have empty default
> constructor TMyClass::TMyClass(void){} ?
>
> P.S. I know that it is possible to have the prototype TMyClass(Int_t a=0)
> but it may help only for simple cases.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Alexander Zvyagin.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 04 2000 - 00:34:36 MET