> class myobj {
> ...
> int a,b,c;
> myobj(int aa, int bb, int cc) :
> a(aa), b(bb), c(cc) const {}
> ...
> };
Ummm no. Straight from Bjarne: "You can't have a const constructor." You
just do what you did without the const. A const myobj is essentially
equivalent (with the exception of not being allowed to call methods not
marked 'const', except the constructor) to:
class myobj {
const ...
const int a,b,c;
` myobj(int aa, int bb, int cc) :
a(aa),b(bb),c(cc) { }
};
So you're initializing the const variables just like you would instance
consts. The constructor can't alter them, but the initializer (thing
before the constructor) can.
But, this isn't a C++ list, so on to Perl. I should certainly hope you can
have instance constants. They can be quite useful, though optimization
doesn't work as well for them.
Oh, and just so you know, I'm basically a C++ linguist. I have practically
memorized Bjarne's The C++ Programming Language. And by that, I maintain
that C++ is the _best_ compiled language. Or at least in my opinion.
Luke
