Do we have to explicitly define a default constructor when we define a copy constructor for a class?? Please give reasons.
eg:
class A
{
int i;
public:
A(A& a)
{
i = a.i; //Ok this is corrected....
}
A() { } //Is this required if we write the above copy constructor??
};
Also, if we define any other parameterized constructor for a class other than the copy constructor, do we also have to define the default constructor?? Consider the above code without the copy constructor and replace it with
A(int z)
{
z.i = 10;
}
Alrite....After seeing the answers I wrote the following program.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class X
{
int i;
public:
//X();
X(int ii);
void print();
};
//X::X() { }
X::X(int ii)
{
i = ii;
}
void X::print()
{
cout<<"i = "<<i<<endl;
}
int main(void)
{
X x(10);
//X x1;
x.print();
//x1.print();
}
ANd this program seems to be working fine without the default constructor. Please explain why is this the case?? I am really confused with the concept.....
See Question&Answers more detail:os