Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 16 Mar 1997 17:08:58 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
To:        Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Barb problem, FOUND 
Message-ID:  <199703170008.RAA03992@rover.village.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 16 Mar 1997 15:19:47 MST." <199703162219.PAA06467@phaeton.artisoft.com> 
References:  <199703162219.PAA06467@phaeton.artisoft.com>  

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199703162219.PAA06467@phaeton.artisoft.com> Terry Lambert writes:
: OK, then I don't know why it's bitching.  It's perfectly valid to have
: a virtual destructor inline: the STL library book does it, so it's an
: OK thing to do.

It is a valid C++ construct, but it is not always handled well by C++
compilers.  That's why it is bitching.  Generally, virtual inlines are
a bad idea for the reasons that I've already gone into.

: Personally, I think it's a compiler bug.

It is.  Quanitifying it is the hard part.

Warner



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703170008.RAA03992>