> G++ 4.0 has a lot more warnings that old compilers. If the build enabled, > say, -Wall, it would convert many warnings about bad code into full-blown > errors.
I don't believe -Wall turns warnings into errors, but perhaps that has changed in GCC 4.0. But at any rate, compiler options are by definition non-standard. > The thing I would mention here is that it's obviously very bad for a > class to have virtual methods but no virtual destructor. It could range from > memory leaks and stuck resource locks all the way to completely undefined > behavior. I think I pretty much agree with G++'s decision on this even if > it's technically allowed to be done this way. Yes, it's often a "bad thing," and that's why I added the virtual destructor. However, it's not illegal, and it would have been helpful if the person who reported the problem provided more information. I doubt very much that GCC has decided that something which is perfectly legal is now illegal, simply because it's not recommended. Dave --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
