Novice consulting a problem, a base class pointer, anti-fuzzy instance class object, if the destructor, must write virtual function, end of the program will not perform to subclass destructor, can lead to memory leaks
, if the base class didn't write the destructor, spicy yao by default will be the base class destructor is virtual function? See a lot of DEMO online, is implements the polymorphic calls, no see have to deal with the base class destructor, so there is the question, many thanks!

CodePudding user response:

Try not to know?

CodePudding user response:

The virtual base class destructor is "best practice" - should always use them to avoid memory leaks, hard to detect,

CodePudding user response:

reference 1/f, the truth is more important than right or wrong response:

try don't you know?

if this is the default under the condition of not write a destructor, and can't write the destructor print it out, how to try? Consult,

CodePudding user response:

refer to the second floor met the goddess response:

virtual base class destructor is "best practice" - you should always use them to avoid memory leaks, hard to detect,

Yeah, I mean if not manually specify is virtual destructor, the default is not? Online mostly about polymorphism of this example, there is no to manually ShenMingJi class destructor is a virtual function, therefore, have any questions,

CodePudding user response:

reference csdnbuku reply: 3/f

Quote: reference 1/f, the truth is more important than right or wrong response:

Try not to know?

if this is the default under the condition of not write a destructor, and can't write the destructor print it out, how to try? Consult,

You in subclass destructor print once, see the parent class without writing a destructor, a subclass destructor will be invoked, don't you know?

CodePudding user response:

reference 4 floor csdnbuku response:

Quote: refer to the second floor met the goddess response:

The virtual base class destructor is "best practice" - should always use them to avoid memory leaks, hard to detect,

Yeah, I mean if not manually specify is virtual destructor, the default is not? Online mostly about polymorphism of this example, there is no to manually ShenMingJi class destructor is a virtual function, has the question reason,

Important things to repeat three times:

The virtual base class destructor is "best practice"
The virtual base class destructor is "best practice"
The virtual base class destructor is "best practice"

CodePudding user response:

refer to fifth floor truth is right or wrong response:

Quote: refer to the third floor csdnbuku response:

Quote: reference 1/f, the truth is more important than right or wrong response:

Try not to know?

if this is the default under the condition of not write a destructor, and can't write the destructor print it out, how to try? Consult,

You in subclass destructor print once, see the parent class without writing a destructor, a subclass destructor will be invoked, don't you know?

Yes, this kind of situation before tried, not to perform, I afraid I manually wrote a subclass destructor will affect results, mainly because of a lot of online tutorials blog about this polymorphism, are not going to write a destructor, so it was very strange,

CodePudding user response:

Online tutorials, blog, such as when a reference is ok, don't see them as the standard.
Want to know in detail, combined with the compiler, and c + + standard

CodePudding user response:

refer to the eighth floor truth is right or wrong response:

online tutorials, blog, such as when a reference is ok, don't see them as the standard.
Want to know in detail, combined with the compiler, and c + + standard

Makes sense, some tutorials, write some DEMO, new nor delete after processing, the whole tutorial written writing sample replication