RE: [pooma-dev] RFA: Reorder Initializers (2 of 3)

[James Crotinger]

Thus, please
accept: if you want g++ users to not have to deal with warning messages
reject: otherwise.

I think this should be submitted as a g++ bug. This is a stylistic thing, and as I said before, it is a pain since member order is an implementation detail that is subject to change, and IMHO I shouldn't have to go through all my constructors reordering initializer lists if I make such a change in the data structure.

I don't understand the warning about the RefCounted copy constructor not being called. It has a copy constructor. Shouldn't it be implicitly called?

Thanks,
Jeffrey D. Oldham
address@hidden