Definitions of interface classes
Alexandros Frantzis
alexandros.frantzis at canonical.com
Tue Mar 26 10:00:54 UTC 2013
Hi all,
in the code we use a couple of slightly different ways to define
interface classes. Although the variations are mostly equivalent
functionally, it would be nice to decide on a standard way and add
it to the coding guide. The variation I see mostly (and use) is:
class Interface
{
public:
virtual ~Interface() {}
virtual void method1() = 0;
virtual void method2() = 0;
protected:
Interface() = default;
Interface(Interface const&) = delete;
Interface& operator=(Interface const&) = delete;
};
There was also some discussion about using:
virtual ~Interface() = default;
because of the noexcept guarantee.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Alexandros
More information about the Mir-devel
mailing list