I was under the impression that virtual functions could not be inlined (seems I read that somewhere), because, especially in the case of polymorphism, which function to call cannot be determined at compile time. I can see cases where the compiler _would_ know that it could be inlined, though. It just seemed that that was a matter of policy in the standard. Is my impression incorrect? Thanks, Lyle Taylor -----Original Message----- From: Eljay Love-Jensen [mailto:eljay@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:33 AM To: m.; gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: pure virtual w/implementation bug in GCC 3.3? Hi m, Thank you for the clarification. :-) 10.4 paragraph 2 clearly shows that the construct is illegal. I'll use the sanctioned form: class Foo { public: virtual ~Foo() = 0; }; inline Foo::~Foo() { } Sincerely, --Eljay
