Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8311557
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 8, 20262026-06-08T19:51:14+00:00 2026-06-08T19:51:14+00:00

In delegate pattern is it good to make the destuctor virtual ? class MyClass

  • 0

In delegate pattern is it good to make the destuctor virtual ?

class MyClass
{
    ...
};

class MyClassDelegate
{
    ...
};

On one hand class MyClassDelegate is an interface and supposed to be inherited from, but on the other hand it’s not supposed to delete the subclass via the MyClassDelegate pointer

What do you think ?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-08T19:51:16+00:00Added an answer on June 8, 2026 at 7:51 pm

    You could consider making it protected non-virtual – then you’re actually enforcing and documenting the fact that you can’t delete an object using that kind of pointer. Some more discussion can be found here

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

In Delphi we can delegate the implementation of an interface to another class, I'm
I'm using the delegate pattern for one of my objects. My idea is that
I made a class that uses the delegate pattern and I put it in
Is it a good pattern to add a @protocol to a Model class and
There's a standard pattern for events in .NET - they use a delegate type
From MSDN doc : A delegate is a type that safely encapsulates a method,
I'm writing a delegate class but it fails to take const member functions. Here
On my app delegate class I have a simple property @property (strong, nonatomic) LoginAppDelegate
I implemented the delegate-callback pattern between two classes without retaining the delegate. But in
In C# can I pass a delegate an argument list for a class constructor

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.