Question

I have a question about the following code:

class MyClass : private boost::noncopyable
{
    public:

    MyClass() {}
    virtual ~MyClass() {}
}

class OtherClass : private boost::noncopyable
{
    private:
    MyClass* m_pMyClass;
}

My thoughts are that MyClass cannot be copied using construction or assignment. Using a virtual destructor is needed if I want to support deriving classes from MyClass, which I do not want to support. I do not intend to create pointers to this class and pass them around.

I do not want a Singleton and I cannot see a downside to removing the virtual destructor.

Do I introduce a potential problem if remove the virtual destructor for a noncopyable class? Are there a better practices to handle a class that does not need to be a Singleton, but I only want one instance in another class and not support inheritance?

Answer 1

No, the entire point of a virtual destructor is so derived classes can properly destruct polymorphically. If this will never be a base class, you don’t need it to be virtual.