[pooma-dev] RFA: Reorder Initializers (2 of 3)

[James Crotinger]

Thus, please
accept: if you want g++ users to not have to deal with warning messages
reject: otherwise.

I think this should be submitted as a g++ bug. This is a stylistic thing,
and as I said before, it is a pain since member order is an implementation
detail that is subject to change, and IMHO I shouldn't have to go through
all my constructors reordering initializer lists if I make such a change in
the data structure. 

I don't understand the warning about the RefCounted copy constructor not
being called. It has a copy constructor. Shouldn't it be implicitly called? 

Thanks,
Jeffrey D. Oldham
oldham at codesourcery.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sourcerytools.com/pipermail/pooma-dev/attachments/20010328/508af3dd/attachment.html>