Followed up on the review - but I do kind of see the value in the GCC
slice of the warning, that hiding some functions provided by a base
class is probably unintended & could result in confusion (or subtle
bugs if the overload set can still compile with some overloads
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:34 AM Sam McCall via cfe-dev
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> This warning isn't a GCC default, it's turned on in clang/CMakeLists.txt (but not enabled for LLVM). This dates back to at least 2008 so I'm not sure if the reasons still apply.
> It has false positives by design that can't be silenced without (IMO) making the code worse. Clang's version of the same warning doesn't have this problem.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20423 >
> I've got https://reviews.llvm.org/D82617 which will make us enable it for clang only, also happy to drop it entirely and let people who want it turn it on.
> Just wanted to check if anyone felt strongly about it, since I don't really know who should review such a change.
> cfe-dev mailing list
> [hidden email] > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev