Renaming of virtual functions

[Carlos Licea]

> Huh? How does that defeat the purpose? The whole point of the "rename"
> refactoring is to make sure that the "thing" you renamed is equally renamed
> in all places. Thats its single sole purpose. If you decide that some piece
> of code in a class shouldn't be in method foo anymore, but in method bar,
> then use the plain text editor to replace foo with bar. There's no point in
> using an extra function for that as that doesn't add any benefit to using
> the editor.
> 
I really think that it should be handled separately, that way you could also 
handle renaming A's function and ask the user if he wants to propagate the 
changes to B... 
I think that a couple of checkboxes with "Propagate the changes to parent" and 
"Propagate the changes to all descendants" when handling virtual functions 
should be enough and also desirable.
In any case I won't discuss the point further but I really think that making 
the separation between parent's and descendant's functions would be really 
useful.

> IMHO there's no bug here and thats also how other refactoring frameworks
> work.
Well, that's a fallacy, the fact that everybody does it means that there's 
some form of consensus, consciously or not, but by no means it means that it's 
the best approach =)

Carlos