I know I must read good book C++ and I will change my code according to your advices but later.

~player() {} - now I have declaration and definition of destructor in the class but I have one more question - I have also something wrong in activation of destructor in my function (second green text near the end of my code):
//game.~player(); // activation destructor - something is wrong
- what is wrong ?

PS. Thanks LennyLen.

delete game - it is bad and I think that we use "delete" when we allocate memory dynamically........

kosmitek:

If at all possible, I would suggest using the code I uploaded here for you earlier. I'm not able to easily read your code, and I'm not entirely sure what's going on -- especially since I don't think you need things like:
int tab2[10]={0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9};
If you wanted an index of 0..4, and 5..9, just use literal numbers and not an array that point to "0..4, 5..9".

That being said, Steve Terry was correct: You never call the destructor itself:
game.~player();

You would do one of two things:

1) Nothing. When you hit the closing "}" for the main() loop, the object's "game.~player()" is called automatically. (This is nice, because you NEVER have to clean up your own code... it is all done automatically for you! )
2) If you have an array of these, and you did something like this:

  player *thePlayer;
  thePlayer = new player(99, 99, 99, 99);

  ...

  delete thePlayer; // <-- You want to call DELETE, which calls the "~player()" destructor for you

Your "player" class IS correctly using classes, though: good job.

The only thing I would like to suggest, coming from a programmer's standpoint: It would be a little better if you were to use header files and keep your class declaration there, and then implement your code in a .CPP file. By doing this, it makes your code portable. If you don't do this, and someday you (or someone else) ever wants to use your class again, they're stuck with YOUR code... they can't simply change the parts they want (like, instead of setting money = a; health = b;, they wanted to use money = b; health = a;, etc.).

Also, with the code I posted for you earlier, the "goto" was removed: this was necessary, because otherwise, your program took up 100% of my CPU and was very "jerky". Having it in a function like I provided allowed the program to take up only 1%, and there was no "jerkiness".

You could VERY easily put your "player" class into the code I provided: the way that you rewrote this code (above) looks like you implemented "player" very smoothly, and it shouldn't be a problem.

<knitpick>Also, your code is harder to read because it's not indented consistently. You may want to give it a pass through either GNU indent or, my preference, aStyle (which is better for indenting/formatting C++).</knitpick>

Steve Terry and TeamTerradactyl thanks for your advice - so I won't declare destructor.
Only one question - now I have 1 object: player game(99, 99, 99, 99); and 4 components private:

Mayby better solution will be 4 objects

 player a(99);
player b(99);
player c(99);
player d(99);

and 1 component private:

Which solution is more OOP ??

PS. TeamTerradactyl I don't understand all your sentences so tomorrow I will use english dictionary

... nitpick. Oh, the delicious irony!

Thank you LennyLen.

The most help me: TeamTerradactyl. Also help me: LennyLen and Steve Terry.

Can I give points for help me on this forum ?

Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean it's not the correct/most helpful one.