From: "Martin Krischik" <Martin.Krischik@T-Online.de>
Subject: Re: Problem Eliminating constructors
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 20:01:09 +0100
Date: 2003-01-21T20:01:09+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <pan.2003.01.21.19.01.09.270430@T-Online.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1n4q2v05i0cn9jnpdelrtroe9l0a7k2noh@4ax.com
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 10:44:37 +0100, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> It is pretty dangerous, so there has to be a strong rationale for this
> (i.e. to allow contravariant parameters).
True. The amount of times where a missing "virtual" drove me insane in C++
is uncounted.
With Regards
Martin
--
Martin Krischik
mailto://Martin@krischik.com
http://www.krischik.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-21 19:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-17 0:19 Problem Eliminating constructors Victor Porton
2003-01-17 15:21 ` John English
2003-01-17 21:10 ` Victor Porton
2003-01-18 15:19 ` Simon Wright
2003-01-20 11:39 ` Rodrigo García
2003-01-20 21:07 ` Victor Porton
2003-01-21 9:44 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2003-01-21 19:01 ` Martin Krischik [this message]
2003-01-21 11:43 ` Rodrigo García
2003-01-21 15:03 ` Stephen Leake
2003-01-21 13:09 ` Victor Porton
2003-01-22 15:26 ` Rodrigo García
2003-01-21 18:38 ` Victor Porton
2003-01-23 17:08 ` Stephen Leake
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-17 6:54 Grein, Christoph
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox