Hi all
why cann't I access protected var from a inherited class?
Code example:

class Base{
protected:
int color;
public:
virtual void show() = 0;
};

class Test:public Base{
public:
Test(int c = 1):color(c){ }; //WHY COMPILE ERROR ??
void show(){
cout << color << endl; // WHY THIS IS OK ??
}
};

int main(void){
Test* test = new Test(10);
test->show();

return 0;
}


THANKS;

Sorry. My compiler is g++ on linux.

* Roka:[color=blue]
>
> class Base{
> protected:
> int color;
> public:
> virtual void show() = 0;
> };
>
> class Test:public Base{
> public:
> Test(int c = 1):color(c){ }; //WHY COMPILE ERROR ??
> void show(){
> cout << color << endl; // WHY THIS IS OK ??
> }
> };[/color]

You get a compilation error because you're trying to /construct/ a base
class member. Not using it, but constructing (initializing) it. That's
the base class' responsibility.

What you can do is to delegate the job to the base class:

class Base {
protected:
int color;
public:
Base( int aColor ): color( aColor ) {}
virtual void show() const = 0;
};

class Test: public Base {
public:
Test( int aColor = 1 ): Base( aColor ) {}
void show() const { std::cout << color << std::endl; }
};

This way Base gives a guarantee that its 'color' member is initialized
whereever you have access to a Base object, which is the point of
constructors.

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

>Alf P. Steinbach 写道：[color=blue]
> You get a compilation error because you're trying to /construct/ a base
> class member. Not using it, but constructing (initializing) it. That's
> the base class' responsibility.
>
> What you can do is to delegate the job to the base class:
>
> class Base {
> protected:
> int color;
> public:
> Base( int aColor ): color( aColor ) {}
> virtual void show() const = 0;
> };
>
> class Test: public Base {
> public:
> Test( int aColor = 1 ): Base( aColor ) {}
> void show() const { std::cout << color << std::endl; }
> };
>
> This way Base gives a guarantee that its 'color' member is initialized
> whereever you have access to a Base object, which is the point of
> constructors.[/color]
[color=blue]
>[/color]
Thank you very much.
So, if I use protected then I can access it but I cannot initialize it
.. Is that right?

what about create a set_color() function in the Base class ?
like:
class Base {
protected:
int color;
public:
virtual void show() const = 0;
void set_color(int c){ // NEW
color = c;
}
};

And use set_color(int) in inherited class instead of initialize color
in constractor of Bass class.

Is that way not good?

* Roka:[color=blue]
>* Alf P. Steinbach:[color=green]
>> You get a compilation error because you're trying to /construct/ a base
>> class member. Not using it, but constructing (initializing) it. That's
>> the base class' responsibility.
>>
>> What you can do is to delegate the job to the base class:
>>
>> class Base {
>> protected:
>> int color;
>> public:
>> Base( int aColor ): color( aColor ) {}
>> virtual void show() const = 0;
>> };
>>
>> class Test: public Base {
>> public:
>> Test( int aColor = 1 ): Base( aColor ) {}
>> void show() const { std::cout << color << std::endl; }
>> };
>>
>> This way Base gives a guarantee that its 'color' member is initialized
>> whereever you have access to a Base object, which is the point of
>> constructors.[/color]
>
> Thank you very much.
> So, if I use protected then I can access it but I cannot initialize it
> . Is that right?[/color]

Not quite. 'protected' has nothing to do with. You couldn't initialize
a base class member, using a constructor initializer list in a derived
class, even if that member were 'public'.

[color=blue]
> what about create a set_color() function in the Base class ?
> like:
> class Base {
> protected:
> int color;
> public:
> virtual void show() const = 0;
> void set_color(int c){ // NEW
> color = c;
> }
> };
>
> And use set_color(int) in inherited class instead of initialize color
> in constractor of Bass class.
>
> Is that way not good?[/color]

It's generally ungood to leave things uninitialized. Having some
set_color function /in addition/ isn't necessarily evil. But leaving
things uninitialized (you have no constructor) is, in general.

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

[color=blue][color=green]
>>Alf P. Steinbach 写道：[/color][/color]
Thank you very much;

"Roka" <Roka100@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1143769822.887253.107550@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...[color=blue]
> Hi all
> why cann't I access protected var from a inherited class?
> Code example:
>
> class Base{
> protected:
> int color;
> public:
> virtual void show() = 0;
> };
>
> class Test:public Base{
> public:
> Test(int c = 1):color(c){ }; //WHY COMPILE ERROR ??
> void show(){
> cout << color << endl; // WHY THIS IS OK ??
> }
> };
>
> int main(void){
> Test* test = new Test(10);
> test->show();
>
> return 0;
> }
>
>
> THANKS;
>[/color]

The following code has 2 errors, understanding them will help you to learn
some of the access rules involved in protected member in base class.

#include <iostream>
using std::cout; using std::endl;

class Base{
protected:
int color;
public:
Base(int c=1): color(c){}
virtual void show() = 0;
};

class Test:public Base{
public:
Test(int c = 1):color(c){ }; //WHY COMPILE ERROR ??
void show(){
cout << color << endl; // WHY THIS IS OK ??
}
void display(Base * b){
cout << b->color << endl; // ERROR
}
};

int main(void){
Test* test = new Test(10);
test->show();
Base * t2 = test;
t2->show();
test->display(t2);

return 0;
}