http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3113
--- Comment #4 from klickverbot <c...@klickverbot.at> 2011-06-16 05:23:12 PDT --- R(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Reopening this, as the compiler doesn't even error out with the »-w« switch > > – > > the »override compulsory« check seems to be broken in the presence of > > »final«. > > Where should the override attribute be required? There is no overriding > happening anywhere in the example. Remove the »final« attribute and compile the example with -w, and you'll see. Besides, since when would it be allowed to have two public methods with the same signature? --- Comment #5 from klickverbot <c...@klickverbot.at> 2011-06-16 05:23:13 PDT --- R(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Reopening this, as the compiler doesn't even error out with the »-w« switch > > – > > the »override compulsory« check seems to be broken in the presence of > > »final«. > > Where should the override attribute be required? There is no overriding > happening anywhere in the example. Remove the »final« attribute and compile the example with -w, and you'll see. Besides, since when would it be allowed to have two public methods with the same signature? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
