Re: Bye-bye Ada ? (Ada95 Wholesale Changes?)

[Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>]

Martin Krischik wrote:
> In fact you can't do this if you want virtual inlines.

Incorrect as well. You can have a virtual inline with the
definition in the class:
     struct a { virtual void foo() { } };

Perhaps you are thinking of providing an implementation
for an *abstract* method:
     struct a { virtual void foo() = 0; }
     inline void a::foo() { assert(false, "Strange!"); }
It's true in this case that the definition and the '= 0'
cannot appear together.

> For virtual inlines you have to do it outside the class
 > definition and you have to provide a non inline version
 > for the virtual function table.
> usualy you it with some ugly #if #endif:

This is totally wrong - you really should learn more C++
if you are going to make pronouncements about it. Inline
functions don't require any separate definitions for being
called indirectly, whether through the virtual table or by
having their address taken. The compiler takes care of that.