On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > But the picky compiler is more likely to complain about taking a protected
> > function private I think.
>
> If Picky Compiler complains with an error, Picky Compiler is broken.
> If it gives a diagnostic - fair enough, compilers are free to give
> diagnostics if they think there is something "unusual" but legal in the code.
Everything that Lars, JMarc and Angus have been cleaning the last few days
as a result of the picky compiler have been warnings about unusual
code. So I figure it'll complain about this stuff also.
> > I only added the virtual tags in the first place
> > so I could keep track of which stuff I had cleaned up.
>
> That's an... uhm... interesting way to keep track...
The functions in the parent are virtual and usually when you define a
derived class you make the derived functions virtual also (unless you
don't want anyone deriving from your derived class). Adding virtual to
these functions doesn't hurt but is a bit silly I admit since they are all
now private in the derived classes.
Allan.
