Destructor in base class: public and virtual or protected and non virtual

Static source code analysis tool for C and C++ code

Brought to you by: danielmarjamaki

Destructor in base class: public and virtual or protected and non virtual

Forum: General Discussion

Creator: Lionel Gimbert

Created: 2020-03-03

Updated: 2020-03-04

Lionel Gimbert - 2020-03-03

Based on Cpp Core Guidelines, the good practice for base classes is to have either a public virtual destructor or a proteted non-virtual destructor (ref: https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppCoreGuidelines.md#Rc-dtor-virtual).

If cppcheck (current head of master) is run with "inconclusive", if there is a virtual method in the base class a protected non virtual destructor will trigger a virtualDestructor error.

From what I seen, changing this would just require to check destructor access specifier in CheckClass::virtualDestructor().

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Daniel Marjamäki - 2020-03-03

From what I seen, changing this would just require to check destructor access specifier in CheckClass::virtualDestructor().

Yeah it is probably a small tweak. Can you open a github pull request?

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Lionel Gimbert - 2020-03-04

It will propably take some days before I have the time do do a proper pull request but there should be no problem.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Log in to post a comment.