On Fri, 2017-10-27 at 10:55 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > Prereq for eventually embedding range analysis into the sprintf > warning > pass. The only thing that changed since the original from a few days > ago was the addition of FINAL OVERRIDE to the before_dom_children > override function. > > Re-bootstrapped and regression tested on x86. > > Installing on the trunk. Final patch attached for archival purposes. > > > Jeff
Sorry to be re-treading the FINAL/OVERRIDE stuff, but... [...snip...] > +class sprintf_dom_walker : public dom_walker > +{ > + public: > + sprintf_dom_walker () : dom_walker (CDI_DOMINATORS) {} > + ~sprintf_dom_walker () {} > + > + virtual edge before_dom_children (basic_block) FINAL OVERRIDE; Is it just me, or is it a code smell to have both "virtual" and "final"/"override" on a decl? In particular, AIUI: "virtual" says: "some subclass might override this method" "final" says: "no subclass will override this method" so having both seems contradictory. If sprintf_dom_walker is providing a implementation of a vfunc of dom_walker, then presumably this should just lose the "virtual" on the subclass, it's presumably already got the "virtual" it needs in the base class. Dave