A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue748 below:

The is_abstract type trait is defined by reference to 10.4.

This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of NAD status.

748. The is_abstract type trait is defined by reference to 10.4.

Section: 21.3.6.4 [meta.unary.prop] Status: NAD Submitter: Alisdair Meredith Opened: 2007-10-10 Last modified: 2016-01-28

Priority: Not Prioritized

View other active issues in [meta.unary.prop].

View all other issues in [meta.unary.prop].

View all issues with NAD status.

Discussion:

I am trying to decide is a pure virtual function is a necessary as well as sufficient requirement to be classified as abstract?

For instance, is the following (non-polymorphic) type considered abstract?

struct abstract {
protected:
 abstract(){}
 abstract( abstract const & ) {}
 ~abstract() {}
};

(Suggested that this may be NAD, with an editorial fix-up from Pete on the core wording to make clear that abstract requires a pure virtual function)

Proposed resolution:

Core has clarified that the definition abstract is adequate. Issue withdrawn by submitter. NAD.


RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4