Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] GGL review starts today, November 5th
From: Patrick Horgan (phorgan1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-22 19:50:16
Steven Watanabe wrote:
> FWIW, non-virtual destructors are the norm in Boost.
> I strongly dislike the idea of having a policy enabling
> virtual destructors.
Steven, could you tell me the reason for this? I have always thought
that if you had virtual methods, you should have a virtual destructor
since the derived class has something different about it and if being
destructed via a reference or pointer to base, the wrong thing could
happen without a virtual destructor! Educate me please. I've never
heard of any reason to avoid a virtual destructor if you already had
virtual methods. Obviously I'm missing something about something I
thought I understood.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk