gcc -Woverloaded-virtual

[Aurélien Gâteau]

David Faure wrote:

> On Tuesday 27 November 2007, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
>> David Faure wrote:
>> 
>> >> Adding a new virtual method to a class is not binary compatible, but
>> >> reimplementing an existing virtual method is binary compatible, or am
>> >> I wrong? In this case we don't need to keep the method.
>> > 
>> > It's BC but old programs that haven't been recompiled will not call the
>> > reimplementation if we re-add it later.
>> > So I would rather leave it, for symmetry with addSubjob being
>> > reimplemented.
>> 
>> This is true if the program instantiates the class itself, but in the
>> case of jobs, they are instantiated by the kio libraries, so I guess the
>> job instances would always have up-to-date virtual tables.
> 
> Well, I was thinking about jobs implemented out of kdelibs, e.g. KMail has
> imap-related jobs that derive from KIO::Job, KIO::SpecialJob, etc. and it
> does call addSubjob/removeSubjob.

Oh I see.
 
>> On the other hand I see your point about keeping the symetry. And you
>> know this code much better than me, so it's your decision.
>> 
>> I can commit the second version of my patch if you want, but I don't feel
>> like doing the other changes we discussed myself, because I don't have a
>> complete KDE checkout.
> 
> I'll do it then, no problem.
> Thanks for the fruitful discussion, was more effort than the actual code
> changes :-)

Was fruitful for me too, as I learnt a few things :-)

Aurélien