Re: Effective c++ member initialization list spurious warning?

["James Tebneff" <tebneff at gmail dot com>]

On 11/7/07, Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com> wrote:

> [1] This is a _good idea_ in many cases, but may not make much sense
>     when there are no other virtual methods and no data members in the
>     derived class, and the resulting addition of a vtable pointer and
>     overhead of calling a virtual destructor is often unacceptable.
>
Yes in this case is it possible for gcc to know that that a virtual
destructor warning is not needed?

struct A{ A(); ~A(); };
struct B: private  A {B();~B();};
int main(){}

$ g++ -Weffc++ t.c
t.c:2: warning: base class `struct A' has a non-virtual destructor

Regards,

JT