This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

A simple question about virtual destructors.


Hi,

My question is what if a compiler will generate a virtual destructor (or convert a nonvirtual to virtual) in a base class if the base class has at least one virtual function and classes down in the hierarchy have nontrivial destructors? In other words make a compiler responsible for proper destruction of a polymorphic object.

Are there any serious pros against this? This suggestion can look stupid but just think how many type strokes and hours in searching of memory leaks this could save.

Kirill.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]