Re: [boost] Is there any interest in a library that provides containers with virtual destructors?

From: Matt Calabrese (rivorus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-27 00:43:30

On 10/27/05, Victor A. Wagner Jr. <vawjr_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> indeed, but there is no dynamic type vs static type in the example.

If you have a virtual_vector<person>* which points to an instance of people,
and you call delete with that pointer as an operand, you have undefined
behavior unless virtual_vector<person> has a virtual destructor since
virtual_vector<person> is the static type and people is the dynamic type.
Whether the base or derived type has a trivial or non-trivial destructor
doesn't change that. The behavior is always undefined.

If you were talking about just deleting a people pointer pointing to a
people object, of course there would be no need for a virtual destructor,
though if that's all that you're talking about, I still don't see why you
are differentiating between trivial and nontrivial destructors. Whether or
not the destructor is trivial or non-trivial still makes no difference, just
like in the previous example.

On 10/27/05, Victor A. Wagner Jr. <vawjr_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I didn't suggest them, I'm arguing that for the example given they
> aren't necessary

This was targeted at the original poster who asked if there is interest. It
wasn't intended for you.

--
-Matt Calabrese