As we all know that behavior of a virtual function only comes into picture at run-time(In other words the memory addresses and other info regarding the function is not available at compile time). Now since the inkscape codebase has been forked out of sodi-podi written in c, many of the gtk-based functionalities require "compile-time" memory based locations and not dynamic run time ones. Therefore introducing virtual functions will most probably break down the functionalities of the existing gtk code in the codebase, as Jon told me. :)

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:14 PM, <J.B.C.Engelen@...1656...578...> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Abhishek Sharma [mailto:spyzer.abhishek0@...400...]
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 03:56
>
> Oh no. My mentor JonCruz told me that adding virtual
> functions in c++ way might break things as c has fixed
> addresses and all, and so making virtual functions(dynamic
> allocation) might infict a blow on the those current functionalities.

I don't understand what you mean.
I think that C++ virtual functions work exactly like the way they are
done C-style in Inkscape; the great advantage of C++ virtual functions
is less typing less errors imho.
But, then again, it is very rare that I am right and Jon is wrong, so...
Jon, enlighten me! ;)

Thanks,
 Johan




--
Abhishek Sharma
B-Tech Information Technology
Indian Institute of Information Technology(Amethi Campus)