on Sun Dec 02 2007, Juergen Hunold <juergen.hunold-AT-ivembh.de> wrote:
Hi Dave !
On Sonntag 02 Dezember 2007, David Abrahams wrote:
Uh, wait: missing virtual d'tors? Sorry, I should have paid more attention. That warning is bogus and I certainly don't want anyone "fixing" it if there are no other virtual functions in the class.
No, they all have "real" virtual functions.
And even if there are other virtual functions, I think it's a suspicious change to make. Please back out any added virtual dtors!
I agree that this warning is bogus. The evil thing is that you can't disabled it, at least on gcc :-((
I've reverted revisions 41544 and 41549, rerun the tests and attached the compressed test output. The nasty thing is that it is triggered during template instation which will polute the output with even more bogus messages. Please take a closer look at both the patch and the compiler log. I'll revert the changes in the meantime. I love atomic commits ;-))
I don't mind the patch so much if there are real virtual functions there. Do whatever you think best. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com