23 Nov
2009
23 Nov
'09
8:17 p.m.
Steven Watanabe wrote:
AMDG
Patrick Horgan wrote:
Steven Watanabe wrote:
FWIW, non-virtual destructors are the norm in Boost. I strongly dislike the idea of having a policy enabling virtual destructors. Steven, could you tell me the reason for this?
There aren't a lot of virtual function in Boost either. In ggl, the only virtual functions I see are in exception classes.
Another part is where virtual functions are used is extension providing projections, however this part is/was not subject of the review. I can confirm no other types consist of virtual methods, thus no virtual destructors are assumed. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org