On Sep 30, 2014, at 3:06 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reid Kleckner <[email protected]> wrote: > Should we really be suggesting that users add C++11 features like override > when -Wcxx98-compat is on? That seems undesirable. > > I think this is yet another reason why we shouldn't have coding convention > enforcement in warnings perhaps? Would ‘final’ not be considered an enforcement? We already have this warning: virtual void g() final; // expected-warning {{'final' keyword is a C++11 extension}} \ - Fariborz > > It's particularly frustrating since we actually have clang-tidy and coding > convention checking now….
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
