220 13320 <9367C570-6D36-4E88-BFD3-85F5A632DEDE@gmail.com> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Krauss Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Tighten rules for virtual override keyword combination Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 23:18:06 +0800 Lines: 30 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <9367C570-6D36-4E88-BFD3-85F5A632DEDE@gmail.com> References: <19267205-7e26-4c12-b9b4-f26ab2f99eb7@isocpp.org> <803262EF-88B4-40B0-AC9B-7C7356CDE56A@gmail.com> <54274B57.6040007@gmail.com> <8DC1AED8-83B6-453A-A93A-EAB6AF942968@gmail.com> <39638C85-5546-444B-A7AA-F873947777B4@gmail.com> <22C84181-5761-4744-AC90-6E252B5CB1E4@gmail.com> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1412004010 15717 80.91.229.3 (29 Sep 2014 15:20:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 15:20:10 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCW25A7E3QCRBQPQUWQQKGQE5LGLSJY@isocpp.org Mon Sep 29 17:20:03 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-yh0-f70.google.com ([209.85.213.70]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XYciY-0005TV-Ni for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 17:18:26 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-yh0-f70.google.com with SMTP id i57sf1820603yha.1 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:18:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :message-id:references:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=563semMT3F+rquXp4zTPD3yv1bz8TkdW/BmraWjFAnk=; b=SDxCygIaLnC4/xRyDNM+Q09mCQiiveNaY6osyr6AT6arxJPj8mykgvr77PA7hjhETA K/fFJMWa0h8A0rV3qCxVonuedFfCnp46FRor6cXVSttvyKbgNqVxWlxN0s6rnVEHTSBJ BoRkue6V57aH630o97D/J6oLz+wJ0fIpCbG5lBwK7vMDDZPrq3NLhScSddCmPa9PNDGU KsSSslpNJrvipErveHSWURI1bFRolo04PpH/UT5l/ID0dr11QwpKVB6GseBWxioI3JCB +10SHmdcxZJtwGGRM4YRbGKzsJtMTHqVhkYS8l8HpCnrjwgP7lEEAGtR19iHK0Avgzng OfFw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkrVpeEQMbMbxdT9v+uimOpidkj3PVmJ04a3zhBhYlpYRBzoCzDb15dxABU40FY+U/RF8wv X-Received: by 10.224.4.196 with SMTP id 4mr36767237qas.6.1412003905916; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:18:25 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.50.66.133 with SMTP id f5ls629473igt.35.gmail; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:18:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.66.140.8 with SMTP id rc8mr59874882pab.75.1412003905325; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:18:25 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-pd0-x235.google.com (mail-pd0-x235.google.com [2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id cx1si23407178pbc.139.2014.09.29.08.18.25 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:18:25 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of potswa@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235; Original-Received: by mail-pd0-f181.google.com with SMTP id z10so3444114pdj.12 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:18:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.70.98.201 with SMTP id ek9mr18222624pdb.150.1412003905042; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:18:25 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [172.20.10.2] ([121.54.54.153]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dc8sm12602870pdb.77.2014.09.29.08.18.21 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:18:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Original-Sender: potswa@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of potswa@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=potswa@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:13320 Archived-At: On 2014-09-29, at 11:10 PM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > Or it demonstrates a very deliberate design choice, rather than a > fundamental misunderstanding. The deliberate choice *is* the misunderstanding. When one implements an abstract class, s/he should read its documentation, or be familiar enough beforehand, to know its public interface. If someone caused a problem which this safety net would have prevented, I'd probably cut them more slack for arguing that it was not deliberate. Just speculating, of course. > That was an example for a potential use of the combination of virtual > and final. It's allowed because > it has potential uses, so forbidding it would need strong motivation, Not really, the alternative wouldn't have been to forbid final without override, but to let final imply override. > If you don't want such overhead, by all means don't use final on a > first declaration of a virtual, > nobody's forcing you to. Eh, at first it had sounded like there was a facility to prevent name hiding, but really there's not. So, I won't. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. .