[K42-discussion] destruction of global kernel objects

[Donour Sizemore]

Bryan S Rosenburg wrote:
> 
> In messing with XBaseObj, I'd be worried about screwing up the method 
> numbers that are embedded in stub-generated code.  Most XBaseObj 
> "methods" are never actually invoked via C++ mechanisms.  Instead a 
> method number arrives in an incoming protected procedure call and is 
> used as an index into the XObj's vtable.  The actual call is programmed 
> out in assembler.  I'm wondering if you've caused a mismatch in the 
> method numbering between what the stub generator expects and what the 
> compiler is actually generating for XObjs.
> 
> - Bryan

Well stubgen will complain if you try to insert things, but XBaseObjCore 
is never actually used directly. All that's in it is a ___dummy function 
that for initializing the vtable.

Reading between the lines, it seems like you're saying that these 
classes shouldn't have destructors and I agree. GCC doesn't.

donour