c++的虚拟构造函数是不可能的。例如，不能将构造函数标记为虚函数。试试这段代码

#include<iostream.h>
using namespace std;
class aClass
{
    public:
        virtual aClass()
        {   
        }  
};
int main()
{
    aClass a; 
}

它会导致错误。这段代码试图将构造函数声明为虚函数。 现在让我们试着理解为什么要使用virtual关键字。Virtual关键字用于提供运行时多态性。例如，试试这段代码。

#include<iostream.h>
using namespace std;
class aClass
{
    public:
        aClass()
        {
            cout<<"aClass contructor\n";
        }
        ~aClass()
        {
            cout<<"aClass destructor\n";
        }

};
class anotherClass:public aClass
{

    public:
        anotherClass()
        {
            cout<<"anotherClass Constructor\n";
        }
        ~anotherClass()
        {
            cout<<"anotherClass destructor\n";
        }

};
int main()
{
    aClass* a;
    a=new anotherClass;
    delete a;   
    getchar(); 
}

In main a=new anotherClass; allocates a memory for anotherClass in a pointer a declared as type of aClass.This causes both the constructor (In aClass and anotherClass) to call automatically.So we do not need to mark constructor as virtual.Because when an object is created it must follow the chain of creation (i.e first the base and then the derived classes). But when we try to delete a delete a; it causes to call only the base destructor.So we have to handle the destructor using virtual keyword. So virtual constructor is not possible but virtual destructor is.Thanks

c++中的虚函数是运行时多态性的一种实现，它们将执行函数覆盖。在c++中，当需要动态行为时，通常使用virtual关键字。只有当对象存在时，它才会工作。而构造函数用于创建对象。构造函数将在对象创建时调用。

因此，如果您将构造函数创建为virtual，根据virtual关键字定义，它应该有现有的对象可以使用，但构造函数用于创建对象，因此这种情况将永远不存在。所以你不应该将构造函数作为虚函数使用。

因此，如果我们试图声明虚拟构造函数编译器抛出一个错误:

构造函数不能声明为虚函数

When a constructor is invoked, although there is no object created till that point, we still know the kind of object that is gonna be created because the specific constructor of the class to which the object belongs to has already been called. Virtual keyword associated with a function means the function of a particular object type is gonna be called. So, my thinking says that there is no need to make the virtual constructor because already the desired constructor whose object is gonna be created has been invoked and making constructor virtual is just a redundant thing to do because the object-specific constructor has already been invoked and this is same as calling class-specific function which is achieved through the virtual keyword. Although the inner implementation won’t allow virtual constructor for vptr and vtable related reasons.

Another reason is that C++ is a statically typed language and we need to know the type of a variable at compile-time. The compiler must be aware of the class type to create the object. The type of object to be created is a compile-time decision. If we make the constructor virtual then it means that we don’t need to know the type of the object at compile-time(that’s what virtual function provide. We don’t need to know the actual object and just need the base pointer to point an actual object call the pointed object’s virtual functions without knowing the type of the object) and if we don’t know the type of the object at compile time then it is against the statically typed languages. And hence, run-time polymorphism cannot be achieved. Hence, Constructor won’t be called without knowing the type of the object at compile-time. And so the idea of making a virtual constructor fails.

面试答案是:virtual ptr和table是和对象相关的，而不是和类相关的。因此构造函数构建虚表 因此，我们不能有虚构造函数，因为在创建obj之前没有虚表。

我能想到两个原因:

技术原因

对象只有在构造函数结束后才存在。为了使用虚拟表分派构造函数，必须有一个现有的对象和指向虚拟表的指针，但是如果对象仍然不存在，指向虚拟表的指针怎么可能存在呢?：）

逻辑的原因

当您想要声明某种多态行为时，可以使用virtual关键字。但是构造函数没有任何多态性，c++中的构造函数只是简单地将对象数据放到内存中。由于虚表(以及一般的多态性)都是关于多态行为而不是多态数据的，因此声明虚构造函数没有任何意义。

总结:c++标准可以为“虚拟构造函数”指定一种表示法和行为，这是相当直观的，而且编译器也不难支持，但是为什么在已经可以使用create() / clone()清晰地实现功能的情况下(见下文)，还要专门为此做出标准更改呢?它远不如正在酝酿中的许多其他语言提案那么有用。

讨论

让我们假设一个“虚拟构造函数”机制:

Base* p = new Derived(...);
Base* p2 = new p->Base();  // possible syntax???

在上面的代码中，第一行构造了一个Derived对象，因此*p的虚拟调度表可以合理地为第二行提供一个“虚拟构造函数”。(本页上有几十个回答说“这个物体还不存在，所以虚拟构建是不可能的”，这些答案都是不必要的短视地关注即将被构建的物体。)

第二行假设符号new p->Base()请求动态分配和另一个派生对象的默认构造。

注:

the compiler must orchestrate memory allocation before calling the constructor - constructors normally support automatic (informally "stack") allocation, static (for global/namespace scope and class-/function-static objects), and dynamic (informally "heap") when new is used the size of object to be constructed by p->Base() can't generally be known at compile-time, so dynamic allocation is the only approach that makes sense it is possible to allocate runtime-specified amounts of memory on the stack - e.g. GCC's variable-length array extension, alloca() - but leads to significant inefficiencies and complexities (e.g. here and here respectively) for dynamic allocation it must return a pointer so memory can be deleted later. the postulated notation explicitly lists new to emphasise dynamic allocation and the pointer result type.

编译器需要:

通过调用隐式的虚拟sizeof函数或通过RTTI获得这些信息，找出Derived需要多少内存 调用operator new(size_t)来分配内存 调用Derived()，位置为new。

OR

为结合了动态分配和构造的函数创建额外的虚表项

因此，指定和实现虚拟构造函数似乎并不是不可克服的，但最重要的问题是:它如何比使用现有的c++语言特性更好?就我个人而言，我认为下面的解决方案没有任何好处。

' clone() '和' create() '

c++常见问题解答文档中记录了一个“虚拟构造函数”习语，包含了用于默认构造或复制构造一个新的动态分配对象的虚拟create()和clone()方法:

class Shape {
  public:
    virtual ~Shape() { } // A virtual destructor
    virtual void draw() = 0; // A pure virtual function
    virtual void move() = 0;
    // ...
    virtual Shape* clone() const = 0; // Uses the copy constructor
    virtual Shape* create() const = 0; // Uses the default constructor
};
class Circle : public Shape {
  public:
    Circle* clone() const; // Covariant Return Types; see below
    Circle* create() const; // Covariant Return Types; see below
    // ...
};
Circle* Circle::clone() const { return new Circle(*this); }
Circle* Circle::create() const { return new Circle(); }

也可以更改或重载create()以接受参数，不过为了匹配基类/接口的虚函数签名，重写的参数必须精确匹配基类重载中的一个。有了这些用户提供的显式功能，添加日志记录、检测、更改内存分配等就变得很容易了。