On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis <[email protected]> wrote:
> This isn’t a style checker, this is to make sure you are not overriding > something by accident. > For context, I took those quotations from a thread about a warning for "using a null pointer other than nullptr" which seems pretty analogous to this warning. "Use this feature because it might help you find bugs" but I think Doug was basically saying that the guideline to use a particular feature is a stylistic one, even if that style then leads to finding bugs. > > It needs to be off-by-default due to the vast amount of C++ code that > exists out there, but we can have it enabled when you create a new project. > > On Sep 24, 2014, at 4:16 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 3:57 PM, jahanian <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> We have an enhancement request from our users to provide >> warning if ‘override’ control is missing. This warning is off by default >> as it will >> be noisy (but it will show itself with -Weverything). >> Is such a patch useful enough to go into the trunk? Also, comment on the >> patch is appreciated. >> I will provide ‘fixit’ later if this is a worthwhile patch. >> > > While I rather like the idea of such a warning, the usual bar has been a > strong aversion to adding off-by-default warnings. I think the theoretical > future might be building warnings like this into clang-tidy, then providing > some plugin-like option to enable certain clang-tidy warnings in your > normal builds. > > (because I was curious, I went back & found some choice quotes from Doug > Gregor on warnings like this (this is what he told me, years ago, when I > proposed adding a warning for null pointers that aren't nullptr*): > > "Off-by-default warnings are not a mechanism to subvert our normal > processes for vetting awarning. In general, we should avoid off-by-default > warnings: if it's not good enough to turn on by default, why do we have > it at all? The vast majority of users will never see an off-by-default > warning." > "A compiler is not a style checker, nor should it ever be." > "Warnings are intended to find potential problems in the source code. > Style migration is the domain of separate tools.") > > (& cc'ing Doug in case there's something about this that's > different/things have changed over the years) > > * today, I'd probably be able to get that in on the basis of compatibility > with GCC's -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant > > >> >> - Fariborz >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-commits mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >> >> > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
