On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 05:12:34PM -0500, Matthew Knepley wrote: > 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
I think templates are overrated, hard to use, hard to debug and they add to the compile time by not allowing separation of declarations and definitions into .h and .cpp files. -- Anders _______________________________________________ DOLFIN-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
