In C++, a diamond problem occurs when a class inherits from two or more classes that have a common base class. This can lead to ambiguity and conflicts in the derived class due to multiple inheritance paths. To illustrate this, let’s consider an example:
#include <iostream>
// Base class
class Shape {
public:
virtual void draw() {
std::cout << "Drawing a shape." << std::endl;
}
};
// Intermediate classes
class Rectangle : public Shape {
public:
virtual void draw() {
std::cout << "Drawing a rectangle." << std::endl;
}
};
class Circle : public Shape {
public:
virtual void draw() {
std::cout << "Drawing a circle." << std::endl;
}
};
// Derived class with diamond problem
class Square : public Rectangle, public Circle {
public:
virtual void draw() {
std::cout << "Drawing a square." << std::endl;
}
};
int main() {
Square square;
square.draw();
return 0;
}
In this example, we have a base class Shape
and two intermediate classes Rectangle
and Circle
, both inheriting from Shape
. The Square
class is derived from both Rectangle
and Circle
.
Now, the diamond problem arises because Square
inherits the draw()
function from both Rectangle
and Circle
, which are conflicting. When we try to call square.draw()
in the main
function, the compiler gets confused about which version of the draw()
function to use.
To resolve this ambiguity, you can explicitly specify which version of draw()
you want to call using the scope resolution operator (::
). Here’s an updated version of the Square
class that resolves the diamond problem:
class Square : public Rectangle, public Circle {
public:
virtual void draw() {
Rectangle::draw(); // Calling draw() from Rectangle
Circle::draw(); // Calling draw() from Circle
std::cout << "Drawing a square." << std::endl;
}
};
In this updated example, we call the draw()
functions of Rectangle
and Circle
explicitly to resolve the ambiguity.
But best Solution is Virtual base class.