On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 19:43 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:03 PM, DJ Delorie <d...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Maybe you and I have completely different ideas about how the whole > > class heirarchy works. I'm not a firm believer that the base-most > > class should be an empty shell of a class that does nothing but > > provide a placeholder for umpteen direct-but-leaf derived classes. > > I would recommend against the idea that the root class of a hierarchy > shall be empty -- except if it is an interface, e.g. an abstract class.
Does a root class with only abstract virtual methods would be acceptable for you? That would add only a vtable. Cheers. -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France *** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***
