[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
warning: base class 'class octave_int_base<long long unsigned int>' has
|
From: |
CdeMills |
|
Subject: |
warning: base class 'class octave_int_base<long long unsigned int>' has a non-virtual destructor |
|
Date: |
Fri, 14 Jan 2011 05:54:09 -0800 (PST) |
This warning appears a lot of time. It seems that common advice is to have:
http://www.gotw.ca/publications/mill18.htm
Guideline #4: A base class destructor should be either public and virtual,
or protected and nonvirtual.
With a lengthy explanation. Do C++ experts from this group agree ? Is there
a "good" option for all cases ?
Regards
Pascal
--
View this message in context:
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/warning-base-class-class-octave-int-base-long-long-unsigned-int-has-a-non-virtual-destructor-tp3217678p3217678.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- warning: base class 'class octave_int_base<long long unsigned int>' has a non-virtual destructor,
CdeMills <=