Suppose I have a class Dog
that inherits from a class Animal
. What is the difference between these two lines of code?
Animal *a = new Dog();
Dog *d = new Dog();
In one, the pointer is for the base class, and in the other, the pointer is for the derived class. But when would this distinction become important? For polymorphism, either one would work exactly the same, right?
Explanation: A base class pointer can point to a derived class object, but we can only access base class member or virtual functions using the base class pointer because object slicing happens when a derived class object is assigned to a base class object.
A base class is also called parent class or superclass. Derived Class: A class that is created from an existing class. The derived class inherits all members and member functions of a base class. The derived class can have more functionality with respect to the Base class and can easily access the Base class.
A base class is an existing class from which the other classes are derived and inherit the methods and properties. A derived class is a class that is constructed from a base class or an existing class. 2. Base class can't acquire the methods and properties of the derived class.
To access the variable of the base class, base class pointer will be used. So, a pointer is type of base class, and it can access all, public function and variables of base class since pointer is of base class, this is known as binding pointer.
For all purposes of type-checking, the compiler treats a
as if it could point to any Animal, even though you know it points to a Dog:
a
to a function expecting a Dog*
.a->fetchStick()
, where fetchStick
is a member function of Dog
but not Animal
.Dog *d2 = dynamic_cast<Dog*>(d)
is probably just a pointer copy on your compiler. Dog *d3 = dynamic_cast<Dog*>(a)
probably isn't (I'm speculating here, I'm not going to bother checking on any compiler. The point is: the compiler likely makes different assumptions about a
and d
when transforming code).You can call virtual functions (that is, the defined polymorphic interface) of Animal equally through either of them, with the same effect. Assuming Dog
hasn't hidden them, anyway (good point, JaredPar).
For non-virtual functions which are defined in Animal, and also defined (overloaded) in Dog, calling that function via a
is different from calling it via d
.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With