On 17 February 2016 at 22:43, Rob Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Patrick Baggett > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Rob Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >>> src/compiler/glsl/lower_discard_flow.cpp:79:1: warning: ‘ir_visitor_status >>> {anonymous}::lower_discard_flow_visitor::visit_enter(ir_loop_jump*)’ >>> defined but not used [-Wunused-function] >>> lower_discard_flow_visitor::visit_enter(ir_loop_jump *ir) >>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> >>> The base class method that was intended to be overridden was >>> 'visit(ir_loop_jump *ir)', not visit_entire(). >>> >> Has there been a discussion about using the "override" keyword >> (C++11)? It sounds like it could catch bugs like this, and if hidden >> behind a #define, act as a no-op when C++11 is not supported. Although >> obviously the new gcc6 warning is effectively doing much the same >> thing... >> > > tbh, I'm not sure what, if any, C++11 discussion has happened.. most > of the code I deal with is C > Recently C++11 came in the context of nouveau's use of tr1 headers, which are missing when building on *BSD (due to clang/libc++) or android (in cases). Note: clover and some parts of gallium/aux have been using c++11 for a while.
Neither of which applies here imho ? -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
