Static C++ check for pure virtual functions passed in constructor to std::bind?

Question

C++ compilers warn if pure virtual functions are directly called in a constructor/destructor (but not indirectly).

Binding a pure virtual function and storing the result in a class member and calling that member all from the same constructor is just a pure virtual call with extra steps.

In this context, std::bind has the advantage that the compiler (or STL) has all the information it needs to do the check: it has the member function pointer and it knows it's in a constructor.

If one could convert std::bind into a macro that inserts a call to the pure virtual function before returning the bind result, it would allow for statically checking against binding pure virtual functions in a codebase. But apparently one can't just call &SomeClass::func(this, placeholders::_1, placeholders::_2, etc) in a macro.

Is there a way to get the compiler to warn that a member function pointer is pure virtual without it being actually called from the constructor ?

• Botje: You could eliminate this problem by construction if you replaced such uses of std::bind by equivalent lambda functions..
• HolyBlackCat: "But apparently one can't just call ... in a macro." Yep. Do you know how to call a member function pointer?
• user17732522: Binding the function or storing a member pointer to it are not the actions that are problematic. Only an actual call from the constructor causes problems. Determining whether an indirect call happens while the variable stores such a problematic value is much harder and generally an undecidable problem.
• user17732522: &SomeClass::func(this, placeholders::_1, placeholders::_2, etc) is just wrong syntax for a member function call. But regardless, how would that help you? Do you want all uses of bind in your program to implicitly cause a call to the function that is being bound? Surely that's not correct behavior...
• Jarod42: @Peter-ReinstateMonica: doing binding for immediate call seems strange anyway, why not call the function directly in that case?