CXX11 patch to warn if 'override' is missing on overriding virtual function

[jahanian]

On Sep 25, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis <kyrtzidis at apple.com> wrote:

> 
>> On Sep 25, 2014, at 11:24 AM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>>  I’d feel a lot better if some part of the warning could be on by default. For example, if you’ve uttered “override” at least once in a class, it makes sense to warn-by-default about any other overrides in that class that weren’t marked as “override”, because you’re being locally inconsistent. Or maybe you can expand that heuristic out to a file-level granularity (which matches better for the null point constant warning) and still be on-by-default.
> 
> This seems like a great idea to me!
> For the 'override' I much prefer if it is class specific to make it less of a burden as an “always on” warning. We could have the checking done at the end of the class definition.
> 

Here is the patch. Warning is on by default. Number of new warnings on clang tests is greatly reduced but there are still some.

	

- Fariborz

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140926/e1e4c312/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: override-patch.txt
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140926/e1e4c312/attachment.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140926/e1e4c312/attachment-0001.html>