The virtual mechanism only works when you have a based class pointer to a derived class object. Construction has it's own rules for the calling of base class constructors, basically base class to derived. How could a virtual constructor be useful or called? I don't know what other languages do, but I can't see how a virtual constructor could be useful or even implemented. Construction needs to have taken place for the virtual mechanism to make any sense and construction also needs to have taken place for the vtable structures to have been created which provides the mechanics of the polymorphic behaviour.

A virtual-table(vtable) is made for each Class having one or more 'virtual-functions'. Whenever an Object is created of such class, it contains a 'virtual-pointer' which points to the base of corresponding vtable. Whenever there is a virtual function call, the vtable is used to resolve to the function address. Constructor can not be virtual, because when constructor of a class is executed there is no vtable in the memory, means no virtual pointer defined yet. Hence the constructor should always be non-virtual.

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.

你也不应该在构造函数中调用虚函数。参见:http://www.artima.com/cppsource/nevercall.html

另外，我不确定是否真的需要虚拟构造函数。你可以在没有它的情况下实现多态构造:你可以编写一个函数，根据所需的参数构造你的对象。

“构造函数不能是虚拟的”

有一些合理的理由可以证明这种说法是正确的。

要创建对象，对象类的构造函数必须与类的类型相同。但是，对于虚拟实现的构造函数，这是不可能的。 在调用构造函数时，还没有创建虚表来解析任何虚函数调用。因此，虚拟构造函数本身将没有任何可以查找的地方。

因此，不可能将构造函数声明为虚函数。

If you think logically about how constructors work and what the meaning/usage of a virtual function is in C++ then you will realise that a virtual constructor would be meaningless in C++. Declaring something virtual in C++ means that it can be overridden by a sub-class of the current class, however the constructor is called when the objected is created, at that time you cannot be creating a sub-class of the class, you must be creating the class so there would never be any need to declare a constructor virtual.

另一个原因是，构造函数的名字与其类名相同如果我们将构造函数声明为virtual，那么它应该在它的派生类中以相同的名字重新定义，但两个类的名字不能相同。所以不可能有一个虚拟构造函数。