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

[Rui Ueyama]

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> 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
>

Can it also delete "virtual" if it has "override"?


>
> — Marshall
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140305/6d5835ea/attachment.html>