Standardize usage of virtual/override/final in ipc/

Standardize usage of virtual/override/final in ipc/

This patch was automatically generated by applying clang fixit hints
generated by the plugin to the source tree.

BUG=417463
TBR=agl@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/39be52ebbd6681c7d79ad63e2a0ab028075af0c2
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#300481}

[dcheng, 2014-10-21 10:48:42]

The CQ bit was checked by dcheng@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-21 10:53:03]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/645623006/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-21 13:52:56]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-21 13:53:48]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/39be52ebbd6681c7d79ad63e2a0ab028075af0c2
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#300481}

[agl, 2014-10-21 17:49:50]

NOT LGTM.

This change should not have been TBRed. Please revert cleanly and then submit an
updated version for review.

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_message_macros.h
File ipc/ipc_message_macros.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_message_macros.h#new...
ipc/ipc_message_macros.h:616: IPC_COMMA_##in_cnt IPC_TYPE_IN_##in_cnt in_list); 
        \
Please fix the indentation here and in other instances of this in the file.

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_perftest_support.cc
File ipc/ipc_perftest_support.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_perftest_support.cc#...
ipc/ipc_perftest_support.cc:145: ~PerformanceChannelListener() override {
VLOG(1) << "Server listener down"; }
Please don't make functions single line just because they can be.

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_send_fds_test.cc
File ipc/ipc_send_fds_test.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_send_fds_test.cc#new...
ipc/ipc_send_fds_test.cc:63: void OnChannelError() override {
base::MessageLoop::current()->Quit(); }
ditto (and elsewhere).

[dcheng, 2014-10-21 17:57:45]

I'll revert this patch per your comments, but:
1) This was a mechanically generated patch. I explicitly mentioned that this
sort of thing was going to be TBRed given the size of the changes.
2) I'm not sure how to address your clang-format comments. If I manually adjust
it, it's going to keep being a problem in future refactoring patches. In
general, it's just not feasible for changes of this size, if the conversion is
going to be done in a reasonable amount of time.

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_message_macros.h
File ipc/ipc_message_macros.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_message_macros.h#new...
ipc/ipc_message_macros.h:616: IPC_COMMA_##in_cnt IPC_TYPE_IN_##in_cnt in_list); 
        \
On 2014/10/21 17:49:49, agl wrote:
> Please fix the indentation here and in other instances of this in the file.

Sorry for missing this. I did spot check all the patches before CQing them. I'm
guessing IPC_COMMAND_##in_cnt throws off clang-format here.

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_perftest_support.cc
File ipc/ipc_perftest_support.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_perftest_support.cc#...
ipc/ipc_perftest_support.cc:145: ~PerformanceChannelListener() override {
VLOG(1) << "Server listener down"; }
On 2014/10/21 17:49:49, agl wrote:
> Please don't make functions single line just because they can be.

This is a clang-format change. I'm willing to make manual formatting changes for
this patch, but in general, this is not possible with large automated rewrites.

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_send_fds_test.cc
File ipc/ipc_send_fds_test.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/645623006/diff/1/ipc/ipc_send_fds_test.cc#new...
ipc/ipc_send_fds_test.cc:63: void OnChannelError() override {
base::MessageLoop::current()->Quit(); }
On 2014/10/21 17:49:50, agl wrote:
> ditto (and elsewhere).

See previous comment.

[dcheng, 2014-10-21 17:58:17]

A revert of this CL (patchset #1 id:1) has been created in
https://codereview.chromium.org/669953003/ by dcheng@chromium.org.

The reason for reverting is: Addressing reviewer comments in a followup patch..

[agl, 2014-10-22 00:35:55]

> 2) I'm not sure how to address your clang-format comments. If I manually
adjust
> it, it's going to keep being a problem in future refactoring patches. In
> general, it's just not feasible for changes of this size, if the conversion is
> going to be done in a reasonable amount of time.

Sounds like clang-format needs to be fixed, at least for the
single-line-function case, if it's to be used in this fashion.

[dcheng, 2014-10-22 00:38:47]

On 2014/10/22 at 00:35:55, agl wrote:
> > 2) I'm not sure how to address your clang-format comments. If I manually
adjust
> > it, it's going to keep being a problem in future refactoring patches. In
> > general, it's just not feasible for changes of this size, if the conversion
is
> > going to be done in a reasonable amount of time.
> 
> Sounds like clang-format needs to be fixed, at least for the
single-line-function case, if it's to be used in this fashion.

It's already been fixed once: it used to collapse short out-of-line definitions
to a single line. Now it only does that for inline definitions. There seem to be
mixed opinions on the latter point still (for example, I know rsesek objects to
this as well). I'd bring it up to chromium-dev, but I think there's a reasonable
chance that no resolution will be reached.