On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:33, Matt Beaumont-Gay <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks, r143972.
Reverted in r144058 -- I assumed incorrectly that -Wnon-virtual-dtor was in -Wall, so I didn't notice that after adding the protected dtor to the base class, -Wnon-virtual-dtor still fired on the subclass. I don't have any real investment in this issue, as long as -Wnon-virtual-dtor stays quiet, so go ahead and adjust both classes to your liking at your leisure :) > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:14, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Appease -Wnon-virtual-dtor >> >>> + virtual ~PseudoOpBuilder() {} >>> + >> >> It looks like the right thing to do is to make the dtor protected and >> non-virtual (this should still silence the warning), as no users >> actually try to destroy these objects polymorphically. ( >> http://www.gotw.ca/publications/mill18.htm ) >> >> - David >> > _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
