Hi, I did some code spelunking to find the -fall-virtual problem.
Fredrik ÃÂhrström
d92-foh@nada.kth.se
Fri Jul 3 06:15:00 GMT 1998
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. :-) )
More information about the Gcc
mailing list