D17563: Don't crash with Qt 5.11+

[Jonathan Marten]

marten added inline comments.

INLINE COMMENTS

> mlaurent wrote in articleviewerwebengine.cpp:68
> ~AkregatorRequestInterceptor() override = default(); no ?

Is there any point in using 'override' on destructors?  There is no function signature to trigger the usual warning case (derived class defines a function with a different signature, so not really replacing the base class virtual), so there is no way a destructor can be written to not override.  The compiler doesn't consider destructors in its override warning.

The only way in which 'override' would be useful on a destructor would be to give an error if the base class destructor was not declared virtual, but with a correctly written base class this should not arise.

REPOSITORY
  R201 Akregator

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phabricator.kde.org/D17563

To: amantia, PHID-PROJ-odxxyyfgujhgbu6ergrt, mlaurent
Cc: marten, asturmlechner, kfunk, kde-pim, dvasin, rodsevich, winterz, vkrause, mlaurent, knauss, dvratil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-pim/attachments/20181214/5f33cd7d/attachment.html>