Re: Virtual destructors are unique virtuals right
From: Andre Kostur (nntpspam_at_kostur.net)
Date: 03/24/04
- Next message: Julián Albo: "Re: Getting the instance pointer from a called function"
- Previous message: John Carson: "Re: templates - friends"
- In reply to: Siemel Naran: "Re: Virtual destructors are unique virtuals right"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 16:19:53 GMT
"Siemel Naran" <SiemelNaran@REMOVE.att.net> wrote in
news:hZc8c.13360$tY6.381457@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> "Howard" <alicebt@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c3qh26$qnu@dispatch.concentric.net...
>> "John Cho" <johncho@johncho.us> wrote in message
>> Not exactly. The destructor of a derived class does not call the
> destructor
>> of its base class, regardless of whether the base class has a virtual
>> destructor.
>
> I disagree. The derived class destructor always calls the base class
> destructor.
Difference of terminology (and mechanism), I think. I prefer to say that
the derived class' destructor "chains back" to the base class' destructor.
- Next message: Julián Albo: "Re: Getting the instance pointer from a called function"
- Previous message: John Carson: "Re: templates - friends"
- In reply to: Siemel Naran: "Re: Virtual destructors are unique virtuals right"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|