Huh, I thought we had already decided on this and have been writing new code in this style :)
Andreas > On Mar 3, 2016, at 8:24 PM, Brent Fulgham <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1. I am in favor of this as well! > > -Brent > >> On Mar 3, 2016, at 11:23 AM, Saam barati <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> +1. >> I like how “override” only reads. >> >> Saam >> >>> On Mar 3, 2016, at 9:54 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I think "virtual" + "override" is more of a historical artifact than >>> the preferred style because we used to have OVERRIDE macro before all >>> compilers supported C++11. I think we should just use only "override" >>> going forward. >>> - R. Niwa >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Darin Adler <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Antti proposed using only “override” a while back since it’s less verbose >>>> and still unambiguous. I don’t think we reached consensus on which style >>>> to prefer for the project, though. >>>> >>>> — Darin >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> webkit-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev >>> _______________________________________________ >>> webkit-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webkit-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
