Re: Is gcc warning about non-virtual destructor useless?

Hi,

I've tested the following example with Visual Studio 2005 and with gcc
4.1.0:

class A {
protected:
   ~A();
};

class B : public A {
public:
   void test() {
      A* a = new B;
      a->~A(); // VS2005: Error C2248: No access to protected
member
      delete a; // VS2005: Error C2248: No access to protected
member
   }
};

Which means, that it's not possible to "delete" a pointer to A*, even
in member functions of classes derived from A. IMHO, this means that
it's perfectly safe to use non-virtual destructors provided that they
are declared as "protected".

Any opinions? How do other compilers behave?