Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Possible Duplicate:
Pure virtual functions may not have an inline definition. Why?
I’ve come accross a function prototype that looks like this:
virtual void functionName(const int x) = 0;
what does that =0 exactly mean?
This denotes purely virtual (abstract) function. Class containing such function is automatically abstract and any class deriving from it you want to instantiate must implement this function.