From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-31 00:35:50
"Philippe A. Bouchard" <philippeb_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Ok. It's a good point and I agree. But:
> - Allocation with operator new (size_t, xmm const &) will still be faster
> - an extra allocation for a counter;
> - amortized allocations in pool (maybe this is a negligible fact but
> still is a fact :).
It's like ripping the seats out of a Ferrari to get an extra 0.2 mph. Sure,
it makes it faster, but do you really want to drive it? ;)
> - How do you assert base classes have virtual destructors?
Well, I would be suprised if there weren't a type trait to detect that. ;)
Seriously, though, if someone uses a pointer polymorphically, and
doesn't declare a virtual d'tor, that's their own fault. Operator delete
and std::free() don't check to make sure you haven't already deleted
a pointer (and perhaps it's not even possible). It's a "user beware"
issue. However, not supporting polymorphism at all is unacceptable.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk