StarMirror/CppCoreGuidelines
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines.git synced 2024-03-22 13:30:58 +08:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

travis CI fixes

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Sergey Zubkov 2018-09-23 16:02:45 -04:00
parent f770a03f2e
commit 8915f05950
1 changed files with 6 additions and 6 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

12
CppCoreGuidelines.md
View File

@ -6787,9 +6787,10 @@ Detection of mistakes.
Writing explicit `virtual`, `override`, or `final` is self-documenting and enables the compiler to catch mismatch of types and/or names between base and derived classes. However, writing more than one of these three is both redundant and a potential source of errors.
It's simple and clear:
- `virtual` means exactly and only "this is a new virtual function."
- `override` means exactly and only "this is a non-final overrider."
- `final` means exactly and only "this is a final overrider."
* `virtual` means exactly and only "this is a new virtual function."
* `override` means exactly and only "this is a non-final overrider."
* `final` means exactly and only "this is a final overrider."
If a base class destructor is declared `virtual`, one should avoid declaring derived class destructors `virtual` or `override`. Some code base and tools might insist on `override` for destructors, but that is not the recommendation of these guidelines.
@ -6822,9 +6823,8 @@ If a base class destructor is declared `virtual`, one should avoid declaring der
We want to eliminate two particular classes of errors:
- **implicit virtual**: the programmer intended the function to be implicitly virtual and it is (but readers of the code can't tell); or the programmer intended the function to be implicitly virtual but it isn't (e.g., because of a subtle parameter list mismatch); or the programmer did not intend the function to be virtual but it is (because it happens to have the same signature as a virtual in the base class)
- **implicit override**: the programmer intended the function to be implicitly an overrider and it is (but readers of the code can't tell); or the programmer intended the function to be implicitly an overrider but it isn't (e.g., because of a subtle parameter list mismatch); or the programmer did not intend the function to be an overrider but it is (because it happens to have the same signature as a virtual in the base class -- note this problem arises whether or not the function is explicitly declared virtual, because the programmer may have intended to create either a new virtual function or a new nonvirtual function)
* **implicit virtual**: the programmer intended the function to be implicitly virtual and it is (but readers of the code can't tell); or the programmer intended the function to be implicitly virtual but it isn't (e.g., because of a subtle parameter list mismatch); or the programmer did not intend the function to be virtual but it is (because it happens to have the same signature as a virtual in the base class)
* **implicit override**: the programmer intended the function to be implicitly an overrider and it is (but readers of the code can't tell); or the programmer intended the function to be implicitly an overrider but it isn't (e.g., because of a subtle parameter list mismatch); or the programmer did not intend the function to be an overrider but it is (because it happens to have the same signature as a virtual in the base class -- note this problem arises whether or not the function is explicitly declared virtual, because the programmer may have intended to create either a new virtual function or a new nonvirtual function)
##### Enforcement