[LLVMdev] [RFC] C++11: 'virtual' and 'override'

[Marshall Clow]

On Mar 5, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:

> 
> On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:53 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> It might be reasonable to warn if a class has both a function marked
>>> 'override' and a function that overrides but is not marked 'override'.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> That could be useful - because it means that the author of the class is at
>>> least thinking about override - but having a "coding style" warning of "I
>>> always intend to use override" would still be useful.
>> 
>> Doug (not sure about other Clang owners) is pretty hesitant about
>> implementing coding style warnings - anything with such a high false
>> positive rate as to be off by default is assumed to be a non-starter
>> in Clang (though perhaps things have changed in the years since I last
>> tested the waters here).
>> 
>> And now that we have something like clang-tidy, it's perhaps less of
>> an issue... we'll see.
> 
> Making it part of clang-tidy would make a lot of sense then!  Is there any plans to get clang-tidy running against the llvm/clang codebases regularly, or is it already happening?

I believe that the “clang-modernize” tool can add “override” in the appropriate places.
	http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7293715/is-there-a-tool-to-add-the-override-identifier-to-existing-c-code

— Marshall


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140305/474b2e11/attachment.html>