Cleanup of [class.virtual] #3987
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This looks like a nice cleanup, but has no feedback. Would we be interested in seeing a rebase to land for C++26 FDIS? |
jensmaurer
requested changes
Aug 24, 2025
| @@ -3748,7 +3748,7 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| \pnum | |||
| A non-static member function is a \defnadj{virtual}{function} | |||
| if it is first declared with the keyword \tcode{virtual} or | |||
| if it is declared with the keyword \tcode{virtual} or | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the "first" wants to say that adding "virtual" on the out-of-class definition does nothing.
|
This is more than moving words around and thus needs CWG review. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is an attempt to make our definition of "override" and "final overrider" more consistent with its use, and includes some small cleanups along the way.
In [class.cdtor] p4 we have the following wording:
We also have the following wording in [expr.call] p3:
In both of these cases, we refer to the final overrider relative to another class. Changing the definition to match the use here seems reasonable. The approach taken here is to define the final overrider of a function relative to a class (as far as I can tell this wording shouldn't change semantics; it accounts for redeclared members not being members of the derived class).
There also was a missing \grammarterms around ref-qualifier, and cv-qualification was changed to be cv-qualifier-seq to match function declarators. Since we no longer need to consider virtual functions to override themselves, it allows us to simplify the wording a bit in other places.