This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/11157] Annoying warning message
- From: "emild at collectivestudios dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 11 Jun 2003 22:14:18 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/11157] Annoying warning message
- References: <20030611183824.11157.emild@collectivestudios.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11157
------- Additional Comments From emild@collectivestudios.com 2003-06-11 22:14 -------
Subject: RE: Annoying warning message
Is it possible to report the warning when an actual attempt to destroy the
object through a Base* is made?
I still think the warning is inappropriate. A virtual function or destructor
is an invitation to the user to call it through a Base*. A non-virtual
protected destructor is an indication that it is not intended for a Base
object to be destroyed through a Base*.
--Emil
-----Original Message-----
From: neil@daikokuya.co.uk [mailto:gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 2:46 PM
To: emild@collectivestudios.com
Subject: [Bug c++/11157] Annoying warning message
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11157
------- Additional Comments From neil@daikokuya.co.uk 2003-06-11 21:45
-------
Subject: Re: Annoying warning message
emild@collectivestudios.com wrote:-
> Except that the non-virtual destructor is protected in this case,
therefore
> you can't destroy the object through a base pointer anyway.
Sure you can. Anything with protected access can.
Neil.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.