...a using declaration should fix it just fine
Change-Id: I05cf76672bcceb7a94afa602e215a0b5a32de82b
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/44591
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
...a using declaration should fix it just fine
Change-Id: I0279994c155775e9a58e93aef8da4522d4fd93fd
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/44590
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
This now hides one of the ScVbaFormatCondition_BASE::Operator overloads, but
that doesn't get called directly at ScVbaFormatCondition anyway. (And if it
were, we could add an appropriate using declaration to ScVbaFormatCondition.)
Change-Id: I8440b76a5745c6874f7a3bfcbb4bc4ce5618a4c4
...when a class derives from multiple (non-virtual) instances of one base class,
and the override disambiguates which of those instances' member to call.
That was the case with SwXTextDocument::queryAdapter
(sw/source/uibase/uno/unotxdoc.cxx), where SwXTextDocument derives from
cppu::OWeakObject through both SwXTextDocumentBaseClass and SfxBaseModel, but
calling queryAdapter through a pointer to SwXTextDocumentBaseClass apparently
needs to call OWeakObject::queryAdapter on the second, SfxBaseModel-inherited
OWeakObject base instance, or else CppunitTest_sw_macros_test fails.
Who knows what other instances of similar non-unnecessary overrides have been
removed with the help of broken loplugin:unnecessaryoverride, for which there
were no tests that started to fail...
Turns out .clang-format lacked "ReflowComments: false" to not break the special
"// expected-error {{...}}" etc. comments in compilerplugins/clang/test/.
Also, use a better location to report loplugin:unnecessaryoverride, to keep
clang-format and loplugin:unnecessaryoverride from fighting over how to split
lines and where to put the comment in
compilerplugins/clang/test/unnecessaryoverride.cxx.
Change-Id: I3b24df24369db12f8ec1080d6c9f7b70ff561a16
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/44418
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
...which is there for MSVC compatibility, but can cause getBody() to return null
even when doesThisDeclarationHaveABody() is true.
And in staticmethods.cxx we need to check doesThisDeclarationHaveABody() instead
of hasBody(): For some class template member functions that are only defined
outside their class definition, as is the case for
OSequenceIterator::hasMoreElements in include/comphelper/sequence.hxx, hasBody()
may be true for the original member function declaration inside the class (as
there is some later definition that does have a body), but
isLateTemplateParsed() is not (it is only true for the later definition). So
just skip any such declarations that are not definitions (which is sane anyway,
as otherwise such functions could pointlessly be inspected multiple times).
Change-Id: I724f652a8f060a931f8b5fc3e4feb5f307a922bf
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/42914
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
to look for inline&empty destructors, where we can just let
the compiler do it's thing
Change-Id: Ibde8800bdfed6b77649c30ebc19921167c33dec3
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/32999
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
Most of its virtual member functions are (though insertRow is already a curious
exception), even though they are defined, so smells like a copy/paste error
rather than deliberate design. And appears to have been the only reason why
loplugin:unnecessaryoverride filtered out such overriding of pure base
functions.
Change-Id: Ib2a40af9cd3cd3dbb26c4147f7d01de4e11f5f6e
which can be replaced with using declarations.
Is there a more efficient way to code the search? Seems to slow the
build down a little.
Change-Id: I08cda21fa70dce6572e1acc71bf5e6df36bb951f
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/30157
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
Tested-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
<sberg> thorsten, remember what that "TODO" in
SvxAccessibleTextPropertySet::getSupportedServiceNames was to be about exactly,
in a909acb7009acadffa53e74ea05ddb88803490f1 ?
<thorsten> sberg: that's a nonsense, prolly copy'n'pasted, or a 'please review
me'
<sberg> thorsten, OK, thanks (that override will eventually go away with
loplugin:unnecessaryoverride, and the TODO comment be lost)
Change-Id: Iba964c61768459aac4067bbd4e1f7d4f78f6adac
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/27232
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
