🚀 go-pugleaf

maxtal@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (John MAX Skaller) writes:

>In article <lkc2k7INNajv@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> db@argon.Eng.Sun.COM (David Brownell) writes:
>>maxtal@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (John MAX Skaller) writes:
>>
>>> I would like to propose that if a class has virtual functions,
>>> then any destructor generated by the compiler will be virtual
>>> by default.
>>
>>Hmmm ... given that I've never seen such nonvirtual destructors be
>>anything except bug, I like the idea of fixing this problem.
>>
>>On the other hand, one of the things I'd really like to see changed is
>>how much stuff a C++ compiler does "for me" automagically.  It's a rare
>>day when it really does what I need to have done; just how often is
>>memory management broken when pointers "owned" by class instances are
>>bitwise copied?  

>	A decent solution could have been had except for the
>extremely unfortunate (IMHO) decision that 'struct' and 'class'
>are synonymous (except for public/private defaults).

>	For example, how about:

>	generate X::X(const X&);

>This could only apply to classes and not 'C' structs for compatibility
>reasons.

>>
>>So, a pair of proposals that I'd be happier to see accepted:
>>
>>   (1)	It is an error for a class to have virtual functions and a
>>	nonvirtual destructor.
>>	
>>   (2a)	C++ compilers don't automagically generate ANYTHING for classes
>>	any more:  constructors, destructors, assignment and address-of
>>	operators, etc.  If such routines are used but not declared and
>>	defined, that is an error.

>	Not possible for C-Structs, compiler MUST automagiocally
>generate constructors and assignment for these.

>
> 		Want to modify (2a) to include 'with virtual functions'?
> ......

How about a new keyword "__pure" to
	1)	prefix "class" in a class definition to stop automagic
		constructor + assignment generation ++
	2)	prefix "virtual" in a pure virtual function
		declaration to get rid of the "=0" hack
	3)	waste some of the compiler implementor's name space
		(rather the the compiler user's name space). The
		user can #define pure __pure if it causes no problem


Doug Gilbert