Implement abstract class as a local class? pros and cons
        Posted  
        
            by sinec
        on Stack Overflow
        
        See other posts from Stack Overflow
        
            or by sinec
        
        
        
        Published on 2010-03-17T14:08:25Z
        Indexed on 
            2010/03/17
            14:11 UTC
        
        
        Read the original article
        Hit count: 205
        
Hi,
for some reason I'm thinking on implementing interface within a some function(method) as local class.
Consider following:
class A{
public:
    virtual void MethodToOverride() = 0;
};
A * GetPtrToAImplementation(){
    class B : public A {
    public:
        B(){}
        ~B(){}
        void MethodToOverride() {
            //do something
        }
    };
    return static_cast<A *>(new B());
}
int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
    A * aInst = GetPtrToAImplementation();
    aInst->MethodToOverride();
    delete aInst;
    return 0;
}
the reason why I'm doing this are:
- I'm lazy to implement class (B) in separate files
- MethodToOverride just delegates call to other class
- Class B shouldn't be visible to other users
- no need to worry about deleting aInst since smart pointers are used in real implementation
So my question is if I'm doing this right?
Thanks in advance!
© Stack Overflow or respective owner