Re: RFC: New C++ Attribute: final

[Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>]

Jeff Sturm wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> > Kevin Atkinson wrote:
> >
> > > Well yes I got the name from Java.  But that doesn't mean that it can't be
> > > useful is C++ also.  Furthermore this attribute is mainly an
> > > optimization so your program will still be correct without it.
> >
> > In Java, the point of 'final' is to say 'not virtual', because all
> > non static member functions are implicitly virtual. In C++ there's no need.
>
>
> If a base class declares a method 'virtual' in C++, can a derived class
> override the modifier, such that calls to the overridden method do
> not require vtable dispatch?
Only when the dynamic type can be determined at compile time.

From a programmer's perspective, why is it desirable to remove the
virtuality?

nathan

--
Nathan Sidwell    ::   http://www.codesourcery.com   ::     CodeSourcery LLC
nathan@codesourcery.com    ::     http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk