Re: [xsd-users] no abstract base classes with "Customizing the generated type — the complex case"

[Oliver Schneider]

Hi Boris,

> I gave it some thought and I don't think there is any use in having the
> _clone() function generated in *_base classes at all.
yes, i agree


> We cannot make it
> pure virtual (that would prevent using *_base as a member). But we can
> simply not generate it at all and I can't think of a good reason why the
> user-supplied implementation would ever want to call _clone() on *_base.

that would make the _clone function very dangerous. As it would give you
a bad copy.

I suggest leaving it in for using *_base as a member, and making it pure
virtual when polymorphism is requested for the class. In the case of
polymorphism, your are expecting that superman_impl is (implicitly)
castable to person_impl. (at least that's how i understood the
"person()" member function of the catalog class, i didn't test it).

/oliver