I have recently used Resharper C++ to automatically add override to destructor declarations, on a very large application. Conclusion: very instructive with reflexions such as: "ha ha! this base class is virtual!"
IOW, override on dtor reveals information which can be useful to understand code. Philippe On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 13:08:36 +0100 Sérgio Martins via Development <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > Looks like some 'override' keywords crept into a few destructors. This > is probably because clang-tidy warns about it (and now QtCreator). > > IMO we should avoid it, as it's misleading. Dtors are a special case and > have completely different semantics. They don't replace their base class > dtors. They're chained instead. > > This is not 100% consensual, some people like to use it. > > But it's discouraged by the Cpp Core Guidelines [1] ; gcc's > -Wsuggest-override doesn't suggest it for dtors and neither does clang's > -Winconsistent-missing-override. > > So clang-tidy is the one odd out. > > I'll update the coding conventions if nobody opposes. > > > > [1] - > https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppCoreGuidelines.md#Rh-override > > Regards, > -- > Sérgio Martins | [email protected] | Senior Software Engineer > Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company > Tel: Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322) > KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
