[ITK] [ITK-users] itk::Command dtor non-virtual on purpose?

[Vaaksiainen]

Hi David,

There you are correct :) My mistake.

I came up with some mixed recursive reference counting which never
decreased in attempt to dispatch events from a filter via its owning
composite filter.

Cheers,
-Vaaksiainen




2015-09-04 15:03 GMT+03:00 David Cole <DLRdave at aol.com>:

> But it is virtual, by virtue of inheriting such status from its base class:
>
> http://www.itk.org/Doxygen48/html/itkLightObject_8h_source.html
>
>
> HTH,
> David C.
>
>
> On Friday, September 4, 2015, Vaaksiainen <vaaksiainen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Retyping the header: is the itk::Command destructor non-virtual on
>> purpose?
>>
>> http://www.itk.org/Doxygen48/html/itkCommand_8h_source.html
>>
>> 64 protected:
>> 65  Command();
>> 66  ~Command();
>>
>> The way I used its derivatives, don't see any reason for such.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> -Vaaksiainen
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/community/attachments/20150904/0c1980a7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_____________________________________
Powered by www.kitware.com

Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html

Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
http://www.kitware.com/products/protraining.php

Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ

Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/insight-users