Matthew Knepley skrev den 25/04-2008 følgende: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Garth N. Wells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Anders Logg wrote: > > > Why should the functions be virtual? > > > > > > > This was discussed the other day (brought up by Ola) > > > > http://www.fenics.org/pipermail/dolfin-dev/2008-April/007496.html > > > > and has been implemented for a few functions in various la classes. I > > was indifferent before to it, but now I see a benefit with the matrix > > classes. If it's clear to me that a function is a virtual function, I > > know that it can't be inlined and there will be some overhead which is > > important to know for some operations. > > One reason that inheritance is outmoded. Templated methods could be > inlined, whereas virtual methods cannot. > > Matt
As a side note, virtual inline might make sense. See: http://www.cubik.org/mirrors/taligent/Docs/books/WM/WM_127.html Ola > > Garth > -- > What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their > experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which > their experiments lead. > -- Norbert Wiener > _______________________________________________ > DOLFIN-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev _______________________________________________ DOLFIN-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
