I am going to go against the flow here... but first, I must assume that your PublicBase
destructor is virtual, as otherwise the Derived
destructor will never be called.
It is usually not a good idea to call a virtual function from a constructor/destructor
The reason for this is that dynamic dispatch is strange during these two operations. The actual type of the object changes during construction and it changes again during destruction. When a destructor is being executed, the object is of exactly that type, and never a type derived from it. Dynamic dispatch is in effect at all time, but the final overrider of the virtual function will change depending where in the hierarchy you are.
That is, you should never expect a call to a virtual function in a constructor/destructor to be executed in any type that derived from the type of the constructor/destructor being executed.
But
In your particular case, the final overrider (at least for this part of the hierarchy) is above your level. Moreover, you are not using dynamic dispatch at all. The call PrivateBase::FunctionCall();
is statically resolved, and effectively equivalent to a call to any non-virtual function. The fact that the function is virtual or not does not affect this call.
So yes it is fine doing as you are doing, although you will be forced to explain this in code reviews as most people learn the mantra of the rule rather than the reason for it.
与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…