On 29.07.08 16:05:16, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Phil Thompson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The "virtual"s aren't valid, but the super-classes should be. Fixed in > > tonight's snapshot. > > Thanks again for the change, Phil. I think you might be mistaken on > this point though. Looking at the c++ standard that I found: > > http://www.kuzbass.ru/docs/isocpp/ > > In section 9-4, it says that structs are just classes that default to > public. Furthermore, in section 10.3-2, they give an example of > structs with virtual methods.
But methods always have a return value, what you had in your original post are constructors and it doesn't make sense for those to be virtual because a subclass always calls its super-class-constructor. Andreas -- You shall be rewarded for a dastardly deed. _______________________________________________ PyQt mailing list PyQt@riverbankcomputing.com http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt