aaron.ballman added a comment. I'd like some help in understanding the motivation for this change. The bug report says `But the intention behind this is clearly that there is a member function A::foo which derived classes overwrite.` and I'm not certain that's so clear. It's been my experience that hidden member function names are unusual and it's hard to ascribe intent to them.
FWIW, I would find this new behavior to be confusing. My mental model for this check is "if it doesn't need to be a member function, make it a static function instead", and this behavior doesn't fit that model. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D66365/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D66365 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
