Little correction... the i are not initialized at all... This happens only if i is static.... thought this changed with C++11.

Who cares what b.i and d.i are? They are private and in your example inaccessible anyways. If you ignore that than b.i and d.i are both 0. Thats the default initialisation for build-in types when no user defined constructor is available...as in your example. Furthermore class B has no virtual destructor -> You don't inherit from it. It is irrelevant whether B and D are in different compile units or not.

"a constructor for a class is auto generated by the compiler when needed"

What constructor? I know four.

It really is unbelievable how many wannabes bad-mouth C++ here and at the same time show that they don't have the slightest idea what they are talking about. 'Disable RAII' suuuure... I compile my programs always with the -no-crash option so my programs never crash... Never heard of it? Not surprising... it is in pre-standard C++21 and only supported in GCC 7.2 ;-)

Another one ranting about something he understands nothing about. Not only that, but he comes with unbelievable 'facts' to back his story. So, all classes are QObjects? Making copy constructors for them? If what you said is true and you had the slightest amount of knowledge about what you write, you certainly would not have ranted about not performed shallow copies. Shallow copies... deep copies... irrelevant. Even beginners of Qt learn very fast that QObjects are non-copyable by design. Both copy and assignment constructors are disabled in QObjects. Under those circumstances:

As expected, he also stores instances in containers - which means every now and then the program would give incorrect results with seemingly no predictable occurrences. It doesn't crash, mind, just gives incorrect answers.

Ridiculous to assume that the program only now an then give incorrect results. Since QObjects cannot be copied into a container by value, it can never give correct results.

So I can only give the advice: Don't listen to the parent. He is a liar and has no idea what he is talking about. The usual C++ hater. Probably it's just sour grapes on his part.

If she does not get the desired job... whose fault will it be? Probably not $DIETY's and in her eyes most likely not her own. Fortunately people like her have always someone to blame... Nasty, nasty "brogrammers".

i really watched the video

And I thank you for this. I really expected this from the first glance on the article's title and waited for a summary like yours to confirm my suspicion. So no need to waste my time :-)

such as lack of equal opportunity,

Yes, lack of equal opportunity could be a problem. But boys do quite well is this field despite constant discrimination.

teaching girls programming in a segregated environment

Suuure.... and not teaching in a segregated environment = wahhhhh.... our precious snowflakes are disadvantaged by boys.

Troll the heck out of them (the "back at ya" option)

My choice on /. ;-)

Hey, atm it is even 'insightful'. Enjoy it as long it lasts... The SJW scum is slow lately, but they surely will come.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

Feminists spread hatred against men. I spread hatred against women. So what?

Feminazis and their lapdogs. To which group do you belong?

This one looks good:
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

since programmers are about as easy to get pointed in the same direction as cats.

Idiotic statement. Programmers are easily pointed in the same directions as anyone else: With money. You want to point people, who work for free in an open source project, in the same direction? Yep, a bit more difficult. As it is for any other voluntary working group.

Meritocracy is soooo misogynist.

We need more do-ers, not more armchair quarterbacks and sofa-seat generals telling us how to run things.

You ask quite a lot from an estrogen poisoned brain.