Differences between "class::mem ber" & "object.mem ber"

[Jian H. Li]

Hello,

What's the essential differences between the two ways of "class::mem ber"
& "object.member" (or object_pointer->member)?

class C{
public:
void f() {}
int i;
};

int main(){
C::f(); // "class::mem ber"
C::i; // "class::mem ber"

C obj;
obj.f(); // "object.mem ber"
}

Can use the syntax "class::mem ber" to invoke a class member(non static)?
(Obviously true, if the class member is qualified by static. I think)

What's the essential differences between the two ways of "class::mem ber"
& "object.member" (or object_pointer->member)?

Is "class::mem ber" used more frequently than "object.mem ber" in program text?

Your Sincerely
Jianhua Li

[Victor Bazarov]

"Jian H. Li" <jo****@xinhuan et.com> wrote...

What's the essential differences between the two ways of "class::mem ber"
& "object.member" (or object_pointer->member)?
"Essential" ? They have different purposes. The former specifies access
to the member in terms of class, the other in terms of class instance.

class C{
public:
void f() {}
int i;
};

int main(){
C::f(); // "class::mem ber"
This is not going to compile. You cannot call non-static member function
that way.
C::i; // "class::mem ber"
Again, it's not going to compile. C::i does not represent a valid
expression.
You need an instance of the class to access non-static members.

C obj;
obj.f(); // "object.mem ber"
}

Can use the syntax "class::mem ber" to invoke a class member(non static)?
Yes, but only from within another member function (where 'this' is assumed).
(Obviously true, if the class member is qualified by static. I think)
Obviously nonsense, since you just put the 'non-static' requirement in the
question, so you cannot answer the question violating that requirement.

What's the essential differences between the two ways of "class::mem ber"
& "object.member" (or object_pointer->member)?
Different syntax for different purposes.

Is "class::mem ber" used more frequently than "object.mem ber" in program

text?

Is 'for' used more frequently than 'if'? Are there more men named John
than men named Michael? What a useless question...

[John Carson]

"Jian H. Li" <jo****@xinhuan et.com> wrote in message
news:c9******** *************** ***@posting.goo gle.com

Hello,

What's the essential differences between the two ways of
"class::mem ber" & "object.member" (or object_pointer->member)?

class C{
public:
void f() {}
int i;
};

int main(){
C::f(); // "class::mem ber"
C::i; // "class::mem ber"

C obj;
obj.f(); // "object.mem ber"
}

Can use the syntax "class::mem ber" to invoke a class member(non
static)? (Obviously true, if the class member is qualified by static.
I think)

What's the essential differences between the two ways of
"class::mem ber" & "object.member" (or object_pointer->member)?

Is "class::mem ber" used more frequently than "object.mem ber" in
program text?

Your Sincerely
Jianhua Li

Non-static members can only be accessed via an object of the class, either
directly or indirectly (access indirectly via an object of the class occurs
when a non-static member is accessed within a non-static member function of
the same class). Thus you CANNOT access a member with C::f() or C::i inside
main().

When accessing a member via an object of the class, you are allowed to used
a fully qualified name if you want, e.g., given

C obj;

both

obj.f();

and

obj.C::f();

are allowed. A more likely use of this syntax is when you have a Base and
Derived class, both of which define f(). From the Derived class, you might
use Base::f() in order to get the Base class version of the function, e.g.,

Derived d;

d.f(); // gives Derived class version of f()
d.Derived::f(); // gives Derived class version of f()
d.Base::f(); // gives Base class version of f()

The same basic mechanism works within member functions of Derived.
--
John Carson
1. To reply to email address, remove donald
2. Don't reply to email address (post here instead)

[Kristian Dupont]

> [...]

Is 'for' used more frequently than 'if'? Are there more men named John
than men named Michael? What a useless question...

There there. No need to frown, is there?

Kristian

[Jonathan Higa]

Jian Li provided the following class:
class C {
public:
void f() {}
int i;
};

John Carson wrote:

Non-static members can only be accessed via an object of the class, either
directly or indirectly (access indirectly via an object of the class occurs
when a non-static member is accessed within a non-static member function of
the same class). Thus you CANNOT access a member with C::f() or C::i inside
main().

Sometimes you may want to access the method C::f itself. First, here's
how you can do it explicitly, using a typedef for clarity:

typedef void (C::*CMethod)(v oid);
CMethod method = &C::f;

Now method is referring to the C::f method. To apply it to an instance
directly, use the .* or ->* operators:

C x;
(x.*method)();

This code invokes x.f().

Here's a practical example, in which clist is an STL container of C
instances (e.g., std::vector<C>, std::list<C>, etc.):

std::for_each(c list.begin(), clist.end(), std::mem_fun_re f(&C::f));

You can thus apply method f conveniently to every C instance in clist
without typing much.

The notation is similar for &C::i. You won't use it unless, say, you're
writing a templatized adapter for a family of C-language structures.
When the time comes, you'll think, "I wish I could just access an
arbitrary C field of a given type. Oh, wait, I can!"

-- Jonathan T. Higa, Ph.D. (hi****@comcast .net)