On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 7:07 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: > Looks good - I'd probably simplify the example to something more like > what we talked about on IRC: > > struct base { void func(char); }; > struct derived: base { void func(int); }; > > derived d; > d.func('x'); // FIXME... > d.func(42); // don't warn > > & maybe mention that that should be under another flag (since these > functions aren't virtual) - (though this could also mean that it'd be > best in another test file, since this file is named > "overloaded-virtual.cpp", but that's a minor detail) > > Up to you there,
Thank you for the feedback. I changed the example to be what we used in IRC, and it's committed in r214362. Bug filed at http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20498 ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
