Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!uunet!rocket!dove From: dove@rocket.uucp (Webster &) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Can we allow virtual function member declarations to be inherited? Message-ID: Date: 1 Aug 90 02:21:53 GMT Sender: news@rocket.UUCP Distribution: comp Organization: Lockheed Sanders Inc. Lines: 38 That way a user will write a definition for the body of a derived class virtual function without declaring it in the derived class definition. The derived class declaration element for the virtual function is then inherited from an ancestral base class and the inherited declaration and explicit definition MUST MATCH or a compile time error occurs. This would be substantially better than the current situation in which given a mistaken difference between the intended base class virtual function calling sequence and the actual derived class calling sequence you just end up with a new virtual function at the level of the derived class with no warning whatever about potential misbehavior. This is problem with a substantial probability of occurance since I have seen this situation occur independently to two different InterViews users. This approach will save people who use public libraries from getting shafted when a minor change happens in the calling syntax of some virtual during a library update. This approach will save people who misdefine the virtual definition in a minor way. This approach will be backward compatible, since redeclaration of the virtual function in the derived class definition will have no effect. Web -- Dr. Webster Dove Dr. Webster Dove Experimental Computing Systems ('X') Lockheed Sanders Inc. Signal Processing Center of Technology 144 Daniel Webster Hwy. Lockheed Sanders Inc. Merrimack, NH. 03054 email: (usenet) ...!uunet!rocket!dove (or internet)