Supposed you have two constructor which initialize differently one member of a class. If you provide a default initialization you call a constructor, then you call a second constructor or a copy constructor/assignment operator in your constructor. The override of the default value cost the call of two constructors instead of one. On 4/20/06, Perry Smith <pedz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I don't understand what you are saying. > > If you have several constructors, you have to initialize each member > in each constructor or have one common constructor. > > If the new syntax was allowed, you could still do that. You could > specify how to initialize it when the member is declared or you could > specify it with each constructor. I'm not suggesting replacing the > current syntax -- just adding to it. > > Perry > > On Apr 20, 2006, at 2:31 AM, Olivier Delannoy wrote: > > > No it's not better because if you have several constructors, the > > initial state of the object does not have to be defined several time, > > one time globally and one time in the constructor. In the case of > > complex object, creating a temporary unused object is not interesting. > > The constructor is the place where you should initialize object > > states. The current way to do stuff is the more efficient way for C++. > > > >
