r255812, thanks!
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 6:45 PM, David Blaikie wrote:
> LGTM, please commit (if you like, if you want to wait for other feedback
> that's OK too)
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Nico Weber wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 6:57 PM, David Blaikie
>> wrote:
>>
>>> (attach
LGTM, please commit (if you like, if you want to wait for other feedback
that's OK too)
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Nico Weber wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 6:57 PM, David Blaikie wrote:
>
>> (attachment missing)
>>
>
> (whoops. looks as expected though, here it is.)
>
> Cursory review
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 6:57 PM, David Blaikie wrote:
> (attachment missing)
>
(whoops. looks as expected though, here it is.)
Cursory review based on description: Sounds reasonable to me. Would want to
> check the C++98 behavior to ensure it is actually relevant/correct to imply
> the possibil
(attachment missing)
Cursory review based on description: Sounds reasonable to me. Would want to
check the C++98 behavior to ensure it is actually relevant/correct to imply
the possibility of 'final' being used to fix the issue.
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits <
cfe-co
Hi,
the attached patch changes
delete called on 'dnvd::B' that has virtual functions but non-virtual
destructor
to
delete called on non-final 'dnvd::B' that has virtual functions but
non-virtual destructor
I'm not sure if it should only do this for c++11 and newer – the new
message is true
