On 03/13/2012 11:43 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
Hmm, now that the reason for using -Wno-non-virtual-dtor has been
documented (760e0d2d7329ca6fc00a8439715bae38becb168a ), I wonder,
should we globally then also turn off the corresponding MSVC warning?
That would be kinda predictable (from a "the usual waste of time"
point of view), as I and others have committed over times dozens of
WaE fixes for this very issue... (I.e. added a virtual no-op
destructor in most cases).
Or does gcc and MSVC warn for different cases of lack of virtual
destructor? Is it certain that in all cases this warning is bogus, in
both the gcc and MSVC cases?
I think the warning is generally non-bogus. The problem is that we were
not able to change the cppumaker-generated C++ headers without breaking
backwards compatiblity[1], and GCC was somewhat over-ambitious with this
warning[2], so had to disable it -- even if we would have preferred to
keep it on.
[1] There might be a way around that after all, adding a non-virtual,
protected destructor to the C++ classes representing UNO interfaces.
Will look into that.
[2] <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7302>
"-Wnon-virtual-dtor should't complain of protected dtor" apparently
solves the problem for cppuhelper/propertysetmixin.hxx that originally
caused problems. Seems to be available at least in the Fedora-16 GCC
4.6.2. (And -Wall appears to no longer automatically enable
-Wnon-virtual-dtor.) Maybe all this allows us to re-enable
-Wnon-virtual-dtor after all; will look into that.
Stephan
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
