----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57160/#review167139 -----------------------------------------------------------
Fix it, then Ship it! This lgtm. I believe that even applying `override` incompletely can prevent bad mistakes, but am unsure if we are willing to tolerate inconsistencies in the Mesos code base at all. What's your stance on this Joseph? 3rdparty/libprocess/src/libevent_ssl_socket.hpp (line 40) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/57160/#comment239292> We should apply `override` here and drop `virtual`. 3rdparty/libprocess/src/libevent_ssl_socket.hpp (lines 43 - 51) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/57160/#comment239290> Since you are about to set a precedent, please drop `virtual` everywhere here. A function which is `override` already necessarily implements a `virtual` function. 3rdparty/libprocess/src/libevent_ssl_socket.hpp (line 63) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/57160/#comment239291> Drop `virtual` here as well. - Benjamin Bannier On Feb. 28, 2017, 8:55 p.m., Greg Mann wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/57160/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 28, 2017, 8:55 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Bannier and Joseph Wu. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Inconsistent use of the `override` keyword in > `LibeventSSLSocketImpl` was causing warnings during > clang builds. This patch makes use of the keyword > across all relevant declarations in the class. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/libevent_ssl_socket.hpp > e589a04d14378f265a8fca871c9f5b0c577f5713 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57160/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > `make check` > > > Thanks, > > Greg Mann > >
