Virtual inheritance impact on constructor - c++

Question

I've started learning about virtual inheritance (and how it may solve problems of having a class derived from two parent classes with same parent). To better understand the mechanism behind it, i made a following example:
class A {
public:
A(string text = "Constructor A") { cout << text << endl; }
};
class B: public A {
public:
B(): A("A called from B") { cout << "Constructor B" << endl; }
};
class C : virtual public A {
public:
C() : A("A called from C") { cout << "Constructor C" << endl; }
};
class D : public B, public C {
public:
D() { cout << "Constructor D" << endl; }
};
I have class A, class B derived from A, class C virtually derived from A, and class D derived from B and C. In main i just form an object of class D: D d; and i get the following output
Constructor A
A called from B
Constructor B
Constructor C
Constructor D
What bothers me is, why is there "Constructor A" signalizing that it is not called by either class B or C. And why is there not "A called from C" before "Constructor C". For the latter one i know it has to do with the class C being virtually derived so i guess it does not call Constructor A again since object from class A has already been formed (twice in fact).
EDIT:
In main i just make one object type D.
int main() {
D d;
}

Answer 1

Firstly, since B derives from A non-virtually, D ends up with two A subobjects (as if you didn't use virtual inheritance at all).
The non-virtual A is constructed by B() (hence "A called from B"), and the virtual one prints "Constructor A" when constructed.
That's because the constructors of virtual (possibly indirect) bases are always called by the constructor of the most derived class (D), rather than by the constructors of any intermediate bases (C).
It means that : A("A called from C") in C() is ignored (since you're not constructing a standalone C). And since D() doesn't mention A in its member initializer list, the virtual A is constructed without any parameters (as if by : A()).
Also, it's worth mentioning that all virtual bases are constructed before the non-virtual ones.
So your code is guaranteed to print Constructor A before A called from B.

Answer 2

The problem
Your code forgot something and you still have two A objects in a D object. You can verify this claim by adding a public int test member to A and try the following code. You will get two different addresses:
D d;
cout << &d.B::test <<endl; // the non virtual A subobject of B
cout << &d.C::test <<endl; // the virtual A subobject of C
Online demo
The solution
All classes that share A virtually and that directly inherit from A must declare the virtual inheritance. So you need to correct class B:
class B: virtual public A {...} // you forgot the virtual here
The code snippets above would work as expected, and you could even address d.test without getting any ambiguity error. Online demo
Edit: The delicate construction of A
The C++ rules require each object with a virtual A sub-object to provide a constructor for A. In your case, D should provide for the virual A's construction.
Since there is no explicit constructor, D will look for a default-construct A. And it finds one, since you provide a default argument for the A constructor. It's misleading because it tells you "A constructor" when in reality it was D that used it.
If you remove this default argument, your code won't compile anymore. You then need something like this to get A properly constructed:
class A {
public:
int test;
A(string text) { cout << "A is constructed: "<<text << endl; }
};
class D : public B, public C {
public:
D() : A("Mandatory, if there is no default consructor") { cout << "Constructor D" << endl; }
};
Online demo
Why are the C++ construction rules like that ? Because when you have virtual inheritance, there is no reason that the A construction by B is drawn over the construction by C . Nor the contrary. On the other side, both B and C define how to construct their A sub-object. To solve the ambiguity in the choice of the right construction, this rule was decided. And it may be painful if the virtual class doesn't have a default constructor.

Answer 3

When a type has a virtual base, the virtual base gets constructed from the constructor of the most-derived type. So "Constructor A" is called from D's constructor.
A bit more detail:
#include <iostream>
struct base {
base() { std::cout << "base()\n"; }
base(int) { std::cout << "base(int)\n"; }
};
struct i1 : virtual base {
i1() : base(0) { std::cout << "i1()\n"; }
};
struct i2 : virtual base {
i2() : base(1) { std::cout << "i2()\n"; }
};
struct d : i1, i2 {
};
Now, if the code creates an object of type i1 the default constructor for i1 calls base(int), as written.
But when you create an object of type d, the constructor for d is responsible for constructing the base object. Since d does not have a default constructor, the compiler generates one that calls the default constructor for base before it calls the default constructors for i1 and i2.
int main() {
d d_obj;
return 0;
}
the output here is
[temp]$ Clang++ test.cpp
[temp]$ ./a.out
base()
i1()
i2()
[temp]$
Note that the constructors for i1 and i2 did not construct the base subobject. The compiler took care fo that: the base should only be initialized once, and the constructor for d did that.
If you want a different initialization for the base object, write that in the constructor:
d::d() : base(2) {}
adding that to the class d produces this output:
[temp]$ Clang++ test.cpp
[temp]$ ./a.out
base(int)
i1()
i2()
[temp]$