Re: Derived private interface

[Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>]

On Jul 6, 12:55 am, Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauh...@futureapps.de>
wrote:

> Instead of sprinkling the program with overriding indicators,
> shouldn't it be normal for a compiler to detect the status of
> a subprogram WRT overriding?

To further elaborate on what Christoph said: it does detect that, and
in fact you *never* need to say "overriding" or "not overriding".
Using those keywords will never change the meaning of a legal
program.  They're there just to protect against accidental errors,
which unfortunately were happening.  Misspelling is one way of
introducing an error.  Also, there are some cases where the rules
about what inherited subprograms are visible and where they're visible
aren't entirely intuitive, so that in some cases even when a
subprogram intended as overriding was spelled correctly, it still
didn't override as intended.  Errors like that don't usually lead to
further syntax errors from the compiler, so it's harder to diagnose
when the program doesn't run as expected.

                                           -- Adam