220 5457 <8ae47c5a-2736-4a96-8ac4-1d2ce1f1bc28@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Maurice Bos Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Not initializing virtual bases of abstract classes Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 77 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <8ae47c5a-2736-4a96-8ac4-1d2ce1f1bc28@isocpp.org> References: <9598a901-3e99-4507-83f5-05402e2ce3c8@isocpp.org> <0ce8faea-ef92-42cb-97ef-3846b7e1418f@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_390_13765841.1374258497770" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1374258499 12037 80.91.229.3 (19 Jul 2013 18:28:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 18:28:19 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCNPPMPKVYDRBQUKU2HQKGQEQR73O4A@isocpp.org Fri Jul 19 20:28:21 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-qc0-f200.google.com ([209.85.216.200]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V0FPf-0000R7-NA for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 20:28:19 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-qc0-f200.google.com with SMTP id n1sf5781001qcx.11 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:28:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=0JjFTfro9p954qLJUaEnCldaPbzh8wEVKmHNPFKXmxE=; b=RVXaqqDaFuLXsLuHMWPOQPHEMdnhnj8pe6lBfnvriayRaamuJJ6vQAuyTub8yq+Nuy KDs5fb/A//1g6Ze8ZXerL80xGl2vofzs6jt4j9oPnLvFJT+WJu5rdNl7NVOJIq/KH5fa 6ec6Wcl06uQjwMto7IMlpOECeD9+n/izdtmXgD4i5qmpdqWoLDkJeBqgt+u8WkcxS5jK FBImjhgeaxE7z4n+xby0N40i9aNhUExSjID3pD06GXUOJ79/sgv6lx3T8YzwpCaJIZ3U 13YLVC7+GTFu1UGYL2cGydgeCVabi5pxtbBbnjALNweECViGnpEpilHUCReCnUiub/pn K41A== X-Received: by 10.236.156.234 with SMTP id m70mr8631625yhk.37.1374258498779; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:28:18 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.49.16.195 with SMTP id i3ls1831370qed.17.gmail; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:28:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.49.36.199 with SMTP id s7mr775835qej.17.1374258498198; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:28:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0ce8faea-ef92-42cb-97ef-3846b7e1418f@isocpp.org> X-Original-Sender: m-ou.se@m-ou.se Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:5457 Archived-At: ------=_Part_390_13765841.1374258497770 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Op vrijdag 19 juli 2013 19:24:28 UTC+2 schreef Cassio Neri het volgende: > > > struct A abstract {}; > struct B : A {}; > > I guess, B would not be abstract. Is that right? > That is what I mean, indeed. > > If so, You can already acomplish this behavior with very little boiler > plate code (no need to introduce a dummy pure virtual method). I tested > this works with GCC 4.8.1: > > struct A { > virtual inline ~A() = 0; > }; > A::~A() = default; > Nice. That seems to solve the problem, indeed. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. ------=_Part_390_13765841.1374258497770 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Op vrijdag 19 juli 2013 19:24:28 UTC+2 schreef Cassio Neri het volg= ende:

struct A abstrac= t {};
struct B : A {};

I guess, B would not be abstract. Is that = right?

That is what I mean, indeed.
 = ;

If so, You can= already acomplish this behavior with very little boiler plate code (no nee= d to introduce a dummy pure virtual method). I tested this works with GCC 4= ..8.1:

struct A {
    virtual inline ~A() =3D 0;};
A::~A() =3D default;

Nice.

Tha= t seems to solve the problem, indeed.

--
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<= /a>.
 
 
------=_Part_390_13765841.1374258497770-- .