On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 16:08 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Basile Starynkevitch <bas...@starynkevitch.net> writes: > > > * I don't know exactly what should be wished with respect to templates. > > Tom Tromey (in CC) have a wonderful insight in > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-06/msg00143.html but I probably did not > > understood all the details & the consequences. In particular I don't > > understand if the mark method in his example has to be supplied or > > generated. > > In Tom's interesting idea, we would write the mark function by hand for > each C++ type that we use GTY with. > > One way to make this approach work for plugins would be to write > > template<typename T> > void > mark(T& t) > { > t->mark(); > } > > Then every plugin which invents new garbage collected types would have > to define a mark method for them.
Isn't that precise statement a good use case for virtual methods? In other words, for that trick to work for plugins, don't we require the mark() method above to be virtual? I would be delighted with that, but I understood that many people don't want to have virtual methods. Maybe I misunderstood? 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} ***
