------- Comment #6 from Thomas dot Lange at sun dot com 2009-07-13 11:56 ------- (In reply to comment #5)
No. I do mean overloaded! It might be nice to have a warning for overloading virtual functions of base classes as well. But my point is that the compiler should help to enforce that every virtual function has the 'virtual' keyword set in its declaration. Thus effectively removing those implicit virtual functions that are allowed in C++. The goal is: Either a function should be explicitly declared virtual in its declaration or not be virtual at all. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31397
