Timeline for C++ Virtual destructors used only when there are virtual functions
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 22, 2018 at 6:49 | comment | added | curiousguy |
@SebastianRedl Or typeid!
|
|
| Jan 13, 2016 at 11:05 | answer | added | user204677 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 13, 2016 at 9:22 | answer | added | Jan Hudec | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jan 13, 2016 at 8:42 | history | edited | manlio |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 13, 2016 at 4:11 | answer | added | Huy Nguyen Ngoc | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 18:36 | comment | added | Sebastian Redl | "I have a parent class and a child class, with no virtual functions, and I have a parent-class-pointer to a child object" - But why would you want that? The only thing you could do with such a thing is destroy it (or use dynamic_cast). | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 18:35 | comment | added | Christian Rau | "if I call delete on the parent-class-pointer, it will only call the parent destructor, even though I also want to call the child destructor." - Yeah that practically is using the class polymorphically then, so given the above rule it actually should have a virtual destructor. Everything fine then. | |
| Jan 12, 2016 at 18:34 | history | edited | enderland | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 5 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Jan 12, 2016 at 18:32 | history | migrated | from cs.stackexchange.com (revisions) | ||
| Jan 12, 2016 at 16:42 | history | asked | programmer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |