On 1/5/2012 1:03 PM, Manu wrote:
That is the case with overriding a non-virtual function - the compiler will
compile it anyway, and most of the time it will work. That's what makes it
so eeevil.
I saw today, or last night, someone suggesting a keyword to make non-virtual
override explicit, and error otherwise. Which actually sounded like a really
good idea to me, and also addresses this problem.
That's correct, it does address it. But not for C++.
The right thing should be the default.
But I fundamentally disagree your choice is 'right'..
Sure.
This is obviously subjective, so I don't think that's a fair assertion.
By 'right', I don't necessarily mean 'the most efficient'. I mean that the code
should be correct. It's ok if extra work is involved in creating the most
efficient version. For example:
int a;
automatically initializes a to zero. This is correct. If you want it to remain
uninitialized,
int a = void;
which will be faster in the cases where the compiler cannot optimize away a
redundant initialization of a. But, it is dangerous because the compiler cannot
always prove that a is initialized before use, hence it is not the default.
But as I've previously said, I understand this can't change now, I've let it go
:P
I understand, I'm just explaining my point of view, and you're just explaining
yours.
