On 3/6/2015 5:23 AM, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 06.03.2015 06:31, Mark Roszko wrote:
>
>> I really don't agree with this patch with marking all the subclasses
>> as virtual just because if the base class parameters ever change for a
>> method the subclasses end up making entirely new funct
And noticed I removed a space between a cast and variable
btw that's not documented in the coding style policy on what to do there.
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Mark Roszko wrote:
> Woops, here.
--
Mark
diff --git CMakeModules/TokenList2DsnLexer.cmake CMakeModules/TokenList2DsnLexer.cm
Woops, here.
diff --git CMakeModules/TokenList2DsnLexer.cmake CMakeModules/TokenList2DsnLexer.cmake
index df2ea8a..80044aa 100644
--- CMakeModules/TokenList2DsnLexer.cmake
+++ CMakeModules/TokenList2DsnLexer.cmake
@@ -374,14 +374,10 @@ const char* ${LEXERCLASS}::TokenName( T aTok )
{
const ch
Hi,
On 06.03.2015 13:13, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> Please do *not* commit any patches for C++ 0x11. Using C++ 0x11 is not
> an option at this point. We still have to support older compilers that
> do not support 0x11. I do not want to abandoned a large segment of our
> user base.
Yes, those we
Please fix you coding policy issues.
+next(NULL),
should be
+next( NULL ),
I see this quite a few places.
On 3/6/2015 12:42 AM, Mark Roszko wrote:
> Just misc fixes of errors in the /common/ folder from coverity. Namely
> the initialization errors fixed by using initialization lists.
>
Please do *not* commit any patches for C++ 0x11. Using C++ 0x11 is not
an option at this point. We still have to support older compilers that
do not support 0x11. I do not want to abandoned a large segment of our
user base.
On 3/6/2015 5:28 AM, Simon Richter wrote:
> ---
> common/fp_lib_table.
... independent from some personal preferences, just from memory clang
is (obviously in contrast to gcc) quite intolerant about that and spits
out many warnings, which makes development on OSX really a pain.
You never see where your own mistakes are.
But, that discussion also was done a couple
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 11:23:44AM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> Which is not really worse than the current state -- the derived class's
> method then becomes a non-virtual member function, and people call the
> base version.
AFAIK the suggested best practice is to add the virtual even on the
deri
Hi,
On 06.03.2015 10:02, jp charras wrote:
> I committed your patches 1, 2 and 3.
Excellent.
> I am not sure patches 4 and 5 are very useful.
That's why I put them up for debate. #5 is more useful together with
override markers in C++11 mode.
Simon
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP dig
---
common/fp_lib_table.cpp| 2 +-
common/project.cpp | 2 +-
eeschema/lib_export.cpp| 8
pcbnew/gpcb_plugin.cpp | 2 +-
pcbnew/legacy_plugin.cpp | 2 +-
pcbnew/router/pns_topology.cpp | 8
6 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(
---
CMakeLists.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/CMakeLists.txt b/CMakeLists.txt
index 1d7b8f3..15ab933 100644
--- a/CMakeLists.txt
+++ b/CMakeLists.txt
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ if( CMAKE_COMPILER_IS_GNUCXX OR CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER_ID
MATCHES "Clang" )
# Establi
Hi,
On 06.03.2015 06:31, Mark Roszko wrote:
> I really don't agree with this patch with marking all the subclasses
> as virtual just because if the base class parameters ever change for a
> method the subclasses end up making entirely new functions. And you
> won't get any errors because it'll ju
Le 06/03/2015 05:08, Simon Richter a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> this is a bunch of low priority patches, because these do not change
> anything really.
>
> - #1-3 are straightforward and probably make sense to apply
> - #4 could make sense, but is not required on currently supported
>platforms becau
13 matches
Mail list logo
