Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!microsoft!jimad
From: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: ~virtual (followup to ~const proposal 1.6)
Message-ID: <71207@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 11 Mar 91 23:27:01 GMT
References: <NGO.91Mar2014617@tammy.harvard.edu> <20012@alice.att.com>
Reply-To: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 16

In article <20012@alice.att.com> bs@alice.att.com (Bjarne Stroustrup) writes:
|I think you meant
|
|	class Derived : Base {
|		virtual double foo() const;
|	};
|
|In that case cfront 2.0 warns:
|
|"", line 5: warning:  Derived::foo() hides virtual Base::foo()

It seems to me a warning message represents a disagreement between 
a language specification and a compiler specification.  If a feature
ought to be in a language, it ought to be accepted by compilers 
without warning.  Warnings might be appropriate when a programmer depends
on implementation dependent features, but why otherwise?