From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7a180be12347b9d3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,7a180be12347b9d3
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-08 10:29:18 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news-x2.support.nl!newsgate.cistron.nl!news2.euro.net!uunet!ash.uu.net!spool0901.news.uu.net!spool0900.news.uu.net!reader0900.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: "Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.object
References: <3c62524f.93369796@News.CIS.DFN.DE>
 <1013094178.985786@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <u66a74idn9n084@corp.supernews.com>
 <3c6392e8.2400843@News.CIS.DFN.DE>
Subject: Re: Merits of re-dispatching [LONG]
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 13:30:04 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Organization: KBC Financial Products
Message-ID: <1013192956.289787@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Cache-Post-Path: master.nyc.kbcfp.com!unknown@mosquito.nyc.kbcfp.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 2.3.3 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.253.250.10
X-Trace: 1013192954 reader0.ash.ops.us.uu.net 5645 204.253.250.10
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19789 comp.object:33697
Date: 2002-02-08T13:30:04-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <dmitry@elros.cbb-automation.de> wrote in message news:3c6392e8.2400843@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
> First C++ does not make any difference between class wide and specific
> objects. The same type B is a class wide in B::f () and specific in
> B::~B (). So the difference in how B::f and B::~B are dealing with
> calls to g(). This is IMO bad.

This is an incorrect view of what is happening. The type is class-wide
in both B::f and B::~B. Calls to B::g are dispatching in both. It's just
that while B::~B is running, the actual type of the object is B, so any
dispatching happens according to B's virtual functions, even if the B
part happened to be part of a derived class. Here's an example:

struct A { virtual void foo() { cout << "A::foo\n"; }void call_foo() { foo(); } virtual ~A() { call_foo(); } };
struct B : A { void foo() { cout << "B::foo\n"; } ~B() { call_foo(); } }
struct C : B { void foo() { cout << "C::foo\n"; } ~C() { call_foo(); } };

When a C object is destructed, it will print "C::foo"., "B::foo", "A::foo".

> type is already *known*. Thus there is no need in [re-]dispatching. A
> call to g() can be statically resolved.

As in my example, not if  the object is passed to some other routine which
makes the dispatching call.