On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 09:34:52AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Fri, 14 Oct 2016, David Malcolm wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 16:27 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > >> FYI, I pushed these in now. I also bootstrapped with the > >> jit included in the selected languages, and hacked the > >> jit code a bit to trigger the problems OVERRIDE intends to > >> catch, just to make sure it still works. > > I propose that we update our coding conventions to mention the OVERRIDE > > and FINAL macros in the paragraph that discusses virtual funcs. > > > > The attached patch (to the website) does so. > > > > OK to commit? > > I noticed this one has neither been rejected nor applied. > > The patch appears fine wearing my wwwdocs maintainer hat, alas I > do not feel confident approving it (content-wise).
fwiw I can't think of any big downsides, I guess there's slightly more work ocassionally when you add a new class that inherits from an old one and slightly more verbosity, but it definitely seems worth it to me. Trev > > Perhaps something for Jeff (now added) or Bernd? > > Gerald > Index: htdocs/codingconventions.html > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/codingconventions.html,v > retrieving revision 1.77 > diff -u -p -r1.77 codingconventions.html > --- htdocs/codingconventions.html 18 Sep 2016 13:55:17 -0000 1.77 > +++ htdocs/codingconventions.html 14 Oct 2016 21:22:44 -0000 > @@ -902,7 +902,10 @@ Its use with data-carrying classes is mo > <p> > Think carefully about the size and performance impact > of virtual functions and virtual bases > -before using them. > +before using them. If you do use virtual functions, use the > +<code>OVERRIDE</code> and <code>FINAL</code> macros from > +<code>include/ansidecl.h</code> to annotate the code for a human reader, > +and to allow sufficiently modern C++ compilers to detect mistakes. > </p> > > <p>
