On 2013/12/04 07:44:47, alph wrote:
https://codereview.chromium.org/101763003/diff/1/src/smart-pointers.h
File src/smart-pointers.h (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/101763003/diff/1/src/smart-pointers.h#newcode54
src/smart-pointers.h:54: ~SmartPointerBase() { if (p_)
Deallocator::Delete(p_);
}
On 2013/12/04 07:34:01, yurys wrote:
> On 2013/12/03 16:17:55, svenpanne wrote:
> > Hmmm, this has been like that before, but why is it safe to have a
non-virtual
> > destructor in a base class here? As it is, nothing prevents an
incorrect
usage
> > AFAICT...
>
> This is a good question. I believe the problem is that
SmartArrayPointer and
> SmartPointer inherit from SmartPointerBase. This could be solved e.g. by
making
> SmartPointer a template with single parameter T. Then it may use
Deallocator
as
> type traits internally, Deallocator in turn can be specialized for array
types.
> This way we could use SmartPointer for both array types and scalar
types.
How about making the SmartPointerBase destructor protected?
Actually nobody should have reference it via the base class.
Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/101763003/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to v8-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
