From: Maarten Kronenburg (M.Kronenburg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-31 15:22:43
> >
> > Probably you would use conversion operators.
>
> Not necessarily, you just make your operators templated on the policy.
> No need to do any conversions.
>
> > But runtime polymorphism allows
> > basetype pointers to derived type objects, and still it works (through
the
> > vtable). So runtime polymorphism can never be fully replaced by
something
> > else.
>
> Of couse you need runtime indirection if you need dynamic indirection
> :). But 99.9% of the times you do not need it. When you need it is
> easy to add.
>
I'm not so sure it will be 0.01%. This integer will be used by MANY users,
and you try to explain to a user that it does not work once you use a base
pointer to a derived object.
This will be one of the most important classes of C++, and I want it to work
ALWAYS.
Therefore in my opinion in this case there is no alternative for runtime
polymorphism.
Regards, Maarten.