Article View: comp.std.c++
Article #911Re: ~virtual (followup to ~const proposal 1.6)
From: Bjarne Stroustrup
Date: Sun, 03 Mar 1991 13:43
Date: Sun, 03 Mar 1991 13:43
28 lines
1237 bytes
1237 bytes
ngo@tammy.harvard.edu (Tom Ngo @ Harvard Chemistry Department) writes
> The opposite thing has also happened to me: in a derived class I have
> meant for a function to be virtual, but because of a minor difference
> in declaration the method in the derived class has created a new vtbl
> entry instead of filling in one declared in its base class. For
> example:
>
> class Base {
> virtual double foo();
> };
> class Derived {
> virtual double foo() const;
> };
>
> Could once think of some protection against this sort of error?
I think you meant
class Derived : Base {
virtual double foo() const;
};
In that case cfront 2.0 warns:
"", line 5: warning: Derived::foo() hides virtual Base::foo()
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<20012@alice.att.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!andante!alice!bsReferences:
<NGO.91Mar2014617@tammy.harvard.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!andante!alice!bs From: bs@alice.att.com (Bjarne Stroustrup) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: ~virtual (followup to ~const proposal 1.6) Summary: warnings can be useful Message-ID: <20012@alice.att.com> Date: 3 Mar 91 13:43:03 GMT References: <NGO.91Mar2014617@tammy.harvard.edu> Distribution: comp Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ Lines: 28