James Robinson wrote: > What's the benefit of omitting the virtual destructor?
The benefit is that the destructor stays out of the vtable, which will potentially reduce the vtable size and save a layer of indirection. I don't consider either of these advantages compelling. I agree that it's overshadowed by the bugs that occur when a caller expects virtual destructor semantics but they're not available. The style guide recommends always providing an empty virtual destructor in interface classes. http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.xml?showone=Interfaces#Interfaces "To make sure all implementations of the interface can be destroyed correctly, they must also declare a virtual destructor (in an exception to the first rule, this should not be pure)." but again, there are valid uses where this is not strictly required. Mark -- Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
