Base class inaccessible due to ambiguity

Well, I can't seem to make a class from two bases just because they
have the same virtual function, even though I'm specifying the exact
function:

struct A
{ virtual void Function(); }
struct B
{ virtual void Function(); }

struct C : A, B
{
virtual void Function()
{
A::Function();
B::Function();
}
};

I didnt know this was not kosher but it is a pickle. Any way around
this?

Thanks
Dan

re: Base class inaccessible due to ambiguity

daniel.w.gelder@gmail.com wrote:[color=blue]
> Well, I can't seem to make a class from two bases just because they
> have the same virtual function, even though I'm specifying the exact
> function:
>
> struct A
> { virtual void Function(); }
> struct B
> { virtual void Function(); }
>
> struct C : A, B
> {
> virtual void Function()
> {
> A::Function();
> B::Function();
> }
> };
>
> I didnt know this was not kosher but it is a pickle. Any way around
> this?
>
> Thanks
> Dan
>[/color]

Hmm, this works for me.

Compiler: g++ (GCC) 3.3.4 (pre 3.3.5 20040809)
OS: Linux, SuSE Pro v9.2

// z.cpp
// to compile: g++ -o z z.cpp
// to execute: ./z
#include <iostream>

struct A
{
virtual void Function()
{
std::cout << "A.Function()" << std::endl;
}
};

struct B
{
virtual void Function()
{
std::cout << "B.Function()" << std::endl;
}
};

struct C : A, B
{
virtual void Function()
{
std::cout << "C.Function()" << std::endl;
A::Function();
B::Function();
}
};

int main()
{
C c;
c.Function();

return 0;
}

Regards,
Larry

--
Anti-spam address, change each 'X' to '.' to reply directly.

re: Base class inaccessible due to ambiguity

Larry,

I compiled the code I supplied and it worked for me too which means the
problem is being triggered elsewhere but the error message is showing
up in the struct definition. gcc can be annoying sometimes. Thanks

Dan

re: Base class inaccessible due to ambiguity

daniel.w.gelder@gmail.com wrote:[color=blue]
> Larry,
>
> I compiled the code I supplied and it worked for me too which means the
> problem is being triggered elsewhere but the error message is showing
> up in the struct definition. gcc can be annoying sometimes. Thanks
>
> Dan
>[/color]

Start at the line number per the error message and look at
previous lines for a missing brace, comma, or semi-colon.

Larry

--
Anti-spam address, change each 'X' to '.' to reply directly.

re: Base class inaccessible due to ambiguity

<daniel.w.gelder@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115181838.623995.246460@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...[color=blue]
> Larry,
>
> I compiled the code I supplied and it worked for me too which means the
> problem is being triggered elsewhere but the error message is showing
> up in the struct definition. gcc can be annoying sometimes. Thanks
>
> Dan
>[/color]

struct A
{
}

is not a struct, but the following is:

struct A
{
};

the following is a struct A with a declared but non-implemented member
function called Function:

struct A
{
void Function();
};

The following does implement Function()...

struct A
{
void Function()
{
// whatever
}
};