From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Mar 16 17:24:57 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA08956
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 17:24:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA08937
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 17:24:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49])
          by who.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id QAA23771
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 16:09:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rover.village.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rover.village.org (8.8.5/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA03992; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 17:08:59 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <199703170008.RAA03992@rover.village.org>
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Subject: Re: Barb problem, FOUND 
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 16 Mar 1997 15:19:47 MST."
		<199703162219.PAA06467@phaeton.artisoft.com> 
References: <199703162219.PAA06467@phaeton.artisoft.com>  
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 17:08:58 -0700
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In message <199703162219.PAA06467@phaeton.artisoft.com> Terry Lambert writes:
: OK, then I don't know why it's bitching.  It's perfectly valid to have
: a virtual destructor inline: the STL library book does it, so it's an
: OK thing to do.

It is a valid C++ construct, but it is not always handled well by C++
compilers.  That's why it is bitching.  Generally, virtual inlines are
a bad idea for the reasons that I've already gone into.

: Personally, I think it's a compiler bug.

It is.  Quanitifying it is the hard part.

Warner