defining a pure virtual

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Aug 31, 2000, Benoit Hudson <bh@techhouse.brown.edu> wrote:

> I've just noticed that defining a pure virtual function works.

Yep.  It's supposed to work.  A pure virtual member function means the
enclosing class is abstract and the function *may* not be implemented
for it.  It doesn't mean the member function mustn't be implemented.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me