Standardize usage of virtual/override/final in chrome/browser/browsing_data/

Standardize usage of virtual/override/final in chrome/browser/browsing_data

The Google C++ style guide states:

  Explicitly annotate overrides of virtual functions or virtual
  destructors with an override or (less frequently) final specifier.
  Older (pre-C++11) code will use the virtual keyword as an inferior
  alternative annotation. For clarity, use exactly one of override,
  final, or virtual when declaring an override.

To better conform to these guidelines, the following constructs have
been rewritten:

- if a base class has a virtual destructor, then:
    virtual ~Foo();                   ->  ~Foo() override;
- virtual void Foo() override;        ->  void Foo() override;
- virtual void Foo() override final;  ->  void Foo() final;

This patch was automatically generated. The clang plugin can generate
fixit hints, which are suggested edits when it is 100% sure it knows how
to fix a problem. The hints from the clang plugin were applied to the
source tree using the tool in https://codereview.chromium.org/598073004.

BUG=417463
R=mkwst@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/d2d19203c2795bb1fec0c8ec6d4bb1dc1dfda9c7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#300575}

[dcheng, 2014-10-21 09:26:03]

The CQ bit was checked by dcheng@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-21 09:27:20]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/666123002/20001

[Mike West, 2014-10-21 09:29:39]

LGTM, thanks.

https://codereview.chromium.org/666123002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/browsing_...
File chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_appcache_helper.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/666123002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/browsing_...
chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_appcache_helper.h:83:
~CannedBrowsingDataAppCacheHelper() override;
I think this is weird. But it's what the thread converged upon, so... :)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-21 09:42:29]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-21 09:42:30]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  android_dbg_tests_recipe on tryserver.chromium.linux
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/android_dbg_tes...)

[dcheng, 2014-10-21 09:52:51]

https://codereview.chromium.org/666123002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/browsing_...
File chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_remover.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/666123002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/browsing_...
chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_remover.h:253: ~BrowsingDataRemover()
override;
Ugh. It turns out this is only conditionally an override--there are times when
it has no base class!

Would you consider having an #if defined(ENABLE_PLUGINS)/#else stanza acceptable
here?

[Mike West, 2014-10-21 10:08:06]

https://codereview.chromium.org/666123002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/browsing_...
File chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_remover.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/666123002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/browsing_...
chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_remover.h:253: ~BrowsingDataRemover()
override;
On 2014/10/21 09:52:50, dcheng wrote:
> Ugh. It turns out this is only conditionally an override--there are times when
> it has no base class!
> 
> Would you consider having an #if defined(ENABLE_PLUGINS)/#else stanza
acceptable
> here?

Bleh. That's unfortunate.

The #if/#else sounds fine, as long as you add a comment explaining why you had
to do it.

[dcheng, 2014-10-21 21:38:16]

https://codereview.chromium.org/666123002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/browsing_...
File chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_remover.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/666123002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/browsing_...
chrome/browser/browsing_data/browsing_data_remover.h:253: ~BrowsingDataRemover()
override;
On 2014/10/21 at 10:08:06, Mike West wrote:
> On 2014/10/21 09:52:50, dcheng wrote:
> > Ugh. It turns out this is only conditionally an override--there are times
when
> > it has no base class!
> > 
> > Would you consider having an #if defined(ENABLE_PLUGINS)/#else stanza
acceptable
> > here?
> 
> Bleh. That's unfortunate.
> 
> The #if/#else sounds fine, as long as you add a comment explaining why you had
to do it.

Done.

[dcheng, 2014-10-21 21:38:20]

The CQ bit was checked by dcheng@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-21 21:41:41]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/666123002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-22 00:06:12]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-22 00:10:00]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/d2d19203c2795bb1fec0c8ec6d4bb1dc1dfda9c7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#300575}