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 6165887
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 23, 20262026-05-23T22:14:39+00:00 2026-05-23T22:14:39+00:00

Reading that you can have final virtual functions in C++0x I am bit confused.

  • 0

Reading that you can have final virtual functions in C++0x I am bit confused. What is the difference to just omitting both modifiers in the first place?

  • 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
    2026-05-23T22:14:40+00:00Added an answer on May 23, 2026 at 10:14 pm

    The difference occurs it’s not the base that uses it, but the derived.

    class Base {
        virtual void foo() = 0;
    };
    class Derived : Base {
        void foo() {} 
        // Still virtual because it's virtual in base- no way to "un-virtual" it
    
        virtual void foo() final {} 
        // Now un-overridable.
    };
    

    Think of it not as preventing overrides, but preventing “any more” overrides.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

I remember reading somewhere that you can provide your own icons without having them
I'm reading lines of text that can come in any order. The problem is
I can't find a reference to it but I remember reading that it wasn't
Are there any good configuration file reading libraries for C\C++ that can be used
I recall reading somewhere that using references to smart pointers can cause memory corruption.
After reading E-myth Revisited, I realize that I can do a better job at
When I open a file for reading in Haskell, I've found that I can't
When reading from a IO::Socket::INET filehandle it can not be assumed that there will
From the reading that I have done, Core Audio relies heavily on callbacks (and
I have this kind of structure that I want to both read and write

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.