--- Comment #5 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-07 09:11 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> > The answer is to
> > ensure the first, non-inline virtual function is defined. That's it.
>
> In my humble opinion, no it's not the answer, at least not in my, and I guess
> in many people's
--- Comment #4 from phresnel at gmail dot com 2010-07-07 06:55 ---
Little update: I "re-opened" this report at
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11793 .
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44841
--- Comment #3 from phresnel at gmail dot com 2010-07-07 06:29 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> >
> > undefined reference to `vtable for IFoo'
> > Suggestions:
> >* Ensure that no (pure) member function of `IFoo' became unintentionally
> > non-pure becau
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-06 15:47 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42540 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-06 15:26 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> undefined reference to `vtable for IFoo'
> Suggestions:
>* Ensure that no (pure) member function of `IFoo' became unintentionally
> non-pure because of a missing or deleted `= 0'
W
