Re: Hi, I did some code spelunking to find the -fall-virtual problem.

[Fredrik Öhrström <d92-foh at nada dot kth dot se>]

On Thu, 2 Jul 1998, Mark Mitchell wrote:

> >>>>> "Mike" == Mike Stump <mrs@wrs.com> writes:
> 
>     Mike> I think I would rather remove -fall-virtual then fix it (or
>     Mike> have it fixed).  Jason, how do you feel?
> 
> I'm not Jason, but I agree.  This is yet another bit of complexity for
> those of us trying to maintain the C++ front-end, and, IMO, with
> little value.  The fewer extensions the simpler our life becomes and

I could certainly live without the switch. It just happened that
almost all my methods in all my classes in a certain project are
virtual so it looked convenient for me. However it looks like the 
code has not worked for a long time. As such there are probably not
many people using it. 

I'd say remove it. It was just fun to find out why it was not 
working.

//Fredrik

(By the way, where do I look to add inheritance to signatures? Yet,
another non-standard. :-) )