virtual vs pure virtual member function

[sam_cit]

Hi Everyone,

I wanted to know as to what is the exact difference between a virtual
function and a pure virtual function?
Thanks in advance!!!

[Jim Langston]

<sa*****@yahoo. co.inwrote in message
news:11******** **************@ q75g2000hsh.goo glegroups.com.. .

Hi Everyone,

I wanted to know as to what is the exact difference between a virtual
function and a pure virtual function?
Thanks in advance!!!

class MyClass
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() { }; // Virtual
};

class MyDerived: public MyClass
{
};

That will compile.

class MyClass2
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() = 0; // Pure Virtual
};

class MyDerived2: pubic MyClass2
{
};

That will not compile. Anything that derives from a class with a pure
virtual must override the method as none is defined.

A method needs to be virtual so the compiler will look for a derived
override in a base class. If a method is pure virtual, a derived class must
override the method.

[s_amrollahi]

On Apr 30, 9:31 am, sam_...@yahoo.c o.in wrote:

Hi Everyone,

I wanted to know as to what is the exact difference between a virtual
function and a pure virtual function?
Thanks in advance!!!

If you declare a virtual function in a class say for example B, you
actually say: The function may be redefined in derived classes.

class B {
public:
virtual void f() { /* ... */ }
};

You define the f() for B and you usually redefine the function in
derived class:
class D : public B {
public:
void f() {/* another defintion */ }
};
virtual function is a primary tool for polymorphic bevaviour. If you
offer no defintion for D::f(), you will use the definition of B::f(),
because as an Inheritance principle, D inherited the public members of
B. Also you can declare f() in D as a virtual function, and the
redefinition process is continued in the classes that derived form D.
pure virtual function is a kind of virtual functions with a specific
syntax:
class B {
public:
virtual void f() =0; // =0 means pure virtual
};
if a class has at least one pure virtual function, it will be abstract
class, so instance creation is impossible. B::f() says you should
implement f() in derived classes:
class D : public B {
void f() { /* ... */ }
};
If you do not implement f() in D, the D is abstract class by default,
because it inherits all the pure virtual functions of class B.
for more detailed (and of course better) description, please see the
following references:
. C++ Standard Draft: Chapter 10
. The C++ Programming Language (3rd edition) by Bjarne Stroustrup:
Chapter 12.
. Design and Evolution of C++ by Bjarne Stroustrup: Chapter under
the title of "Class Concepts Refinements"

Regards,

[James Kanze]

On Apr 30, 7:31 am, sam_...@yahoo.c o.in wrote:

I wanted to know as to what is the exact difference between a virtual
function and a pure virtual function?

A class which contains a pure virtual function is abstract, and
cannot be instantiated. A function call using dynamic
resolution results in undefined behavior if it would resolve to
a pure virtual function, and a pure virtual function is not
automatically considered "used", and so doesn't have to be
implemented unless it is actually called (e.g. by means of a
scope resolution operator, or implicitly from the destructor of
a derived class, if it is the destructor).

Thus:

class Base
{
public:
virtual void f() ; // Must be defined...
virtual void g() = 0 ;
virtual void h() = 0 ;

Base()
{
f() ; // calls Base::f()...
g() ; // undefined behavior...
Base::h() ; // calls Base::h, which
// must be defined.
}
} ;

Note that it is not necessary to defined Base::g() unless some
derived class calls Base::g().

--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:ja******* **@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientier ter Datenverarbeitu ng
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, [phone]

[Prashanth]

class MyClass

{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() { }; // Virtual

};

class MyDerived: public MyClass
{

};

That will compile.

class MyClass2
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() = 0; // Pure Virtual

};

class MyDerived2: pubic MyClass2
{

};

That will not compile. Anything that derives from a class with a pure
virtual must override the method as none is defined.

No. It will compile. MyDerived2 will be an abstract class and you
cannot create an instance of it.

If a method is pure virtual, a derived class must
override the method.

Not necessarily, unless one wants to create an instance of the derived
class.

[red floyd]

sa*****@yahoo.c o.in wrote:

Hi Everyone,

I wanted to know as to what is the exact difference between a virtual
function and a pure virtual function?

Your question is actually a FAQ. You can find the answer at
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit...t.html#faq-5.2

[anon]

Prashanth wrote:

>class MyClass
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() { }; // Virtual

};

class MyDerived: public MyClass
{

};

That will compile.

class MyClass2
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() = 0; // Pure Virtual

};

class MyDerived2: pubic MyClass2
{

};

That will not compile. Anything that derives from a class with a pure
virtual must override the method as none is defined.

No. It will compile. MyDerived2 will be an abstract class and you
cannot create an instance of it.

If it compiles for you, it means your compiler is broken. This is what I
get with gcc 4.1.2:

[zzz@cherry data_create]$ g++ jj.cpp -o jj
jj.cpp: In function ‘int main()’:
jj.cpp:13: error: cannot declare variable ‘a’ to be of abstract type
‘MyDerived2’
jj.cpp:8: note: because the following virtual functions are pure
within ‘MyDerived2’:
jj.cpp:4: note: virtual void MyClass2::MyFun ction()

BTW there is a typo in the example. This is correct:

class MyClass2
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() = 0;
};

class MyDerived2 : public MyClass2
{
};

int main()
{
MyDerived2 a;
}

>

> If a method is pure virtual, a derived class must
override the method.

Not necessarily, unless one wants to create an instance of the derived
class.

What is a point of a class, if it is not used??

[James Kanze]

On May 1, 3:25 pm, anon <[e-mail] e:

Prashanth wrote:

class MyClass
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() { }; // Virtual
};

class MyDerived: public MyClass
{
};

That will compile.

class MyClass2
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() = 0; // Pure Virtual
};

class MyDerived2: pubic MyClass2
{
};

That will not compile. Anything that derives from a class with a pure
virtual must override the method as none is defined.

No. It will compile. MyDerived2 will be an abstract class and you
cannot create an instance of it.

If it compiles for you, it means your compiler is broken.

The standard requires that it compile. It compiles with every
compiler I've ever used.

This is what I
get with gcc 4.1.2:

[zzz@cherry data_create]$ g++ jj.cpp -o jj
jj.cpp: In function ?int main()?:
jj.cpp:13: error: cannot declare variable ?a? to be of abstract type
?MyDerived2?
jj.cpp:8: note: because the following virtual functions are pure
within ?MyDerived2?:
jj.cpp:4: note: virtual void MyClass2::MyFun ction()

Obviously, you've added some code which is illegal.

BTW there is a typo in the example. This is correct:

class MyClass2
{
public:
virtual void MyFunction() = 0;
};

class MyDerived2 : public MyClass2
{
};

int main()
{
MyDerived2 a;

Mainly, this. That wasn't in Prashanth's example, and in fact,
he explicitly said that it wasn't legal.

}

If a method is pure virtual, a derived class must
override the method.

Not necessarily, unless one wants to create an instance of the derived
class.

What is a point of a class, if it is not used??

Who said you cannot use it? You cannot create an instance of it
(as a full object, at any rate). You can still use it as a base
class, for further derivation, or use it in any context that
doesn't require an instance.
--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:ja******* **@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientier ter Datenverarbeitu ng
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, [phone]