[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Some thoughts on kdelibs et al.
From:       Andrew Sutton <ansutton () sep ! com>
Date:       2001-09-26 4:32:48
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 25 September 2001 14:37, Marc Mutz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tuesday 25 September 2001 10:24, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 September 2001 01:54, Marc Mutz wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> That's not the point. The point is that it _adds_ information, while
> stubbornly repeating the virtual keyword in each derived class doesn't.
> Worse, you could mistakenly add it to a non-virtual function (not sure
> if the compiler would complain <testing> no, it doesn't).
>
> You should let the compiler do the housekeeping.
>
> And one last argument: If Bjarne himself doesn't repeat the virtual
> keyword... ;-)

i'd have to agree with john's previous response here. in a class set as large 
and complicated as kde, information from the base class should be repeated in 
derived classes - even if it is redundant. not everybody wants to go hunting 
through long hierarchy lists to determine if a method is virtual or not... 
its just good sense.

class A { virtual void foo(); };
class B : public A { virtual void foo(); };

andy
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]