Standardize usage of virtual/override/final specifiers.

Standardize usage of virtual/override/final specifiers.

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=nasko@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/fa85b15991d5df67e3adf18a46a1c0fdca163568
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#301534}

[nasko, 2014-10-27 21:06:39]

Just one nit. It also looks that the patch didn't apply cleanly :(

https://codereview.chromium.org/678073006/diff/1/content/browser/power_monito...
File content/browser/power_monitor_message_broadcaster_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/678073006/diff/1/content/browser/power_monito...
content/browser/power_monitor_message_broadcaster_unittest.cc:56:
~PowerMonitorMessageBroadcasterTest() override{};
nit: shouldn't there be space between override and {}?

[dcheng, 2014-10-27 21:08:40]

On 2014/10/27 at 21:06:39, nasko wrote:
> Just one nit. It also looks that the patch didn't apply cleanly :(
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/678073006/diff/1/content/browser/power_monito...
> File content/browser/power_monitor_message_broadcaster_unittest.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/678073006/diff/1/content/browser/power_monito...
> content/browser/power_monitor_message_broadcaster_unittest.cc:56:
~PowerMonitorMessageBroadcasterTest() override{};
> nit: shouldn't there be space between override and {}?

That's weird. Given the patch conflicts and git cl format not handling this
case, I'm going to skip this one for now until the other patches have landed.

[dcheng, 2014-10-27 22:00:12]

PTAL. I've rebased it and figured out the clang-format weirdness =)

https://codereview.chromium.org/678073006/diff/1/content/browser/power_monito...
File content/browser/power_monitor_message_broadcaster_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/678073006/diff/1/content/browser/power_monito...
content/browser/power_monitor_message_broadcaster_unittest.cc:56:
~PowerMonitorMessageBroadcasterTest() override{};
On 2014/10/27 21:06:39, nasko wrote:
> nit: shouldn't there be space between override and {}?

Oh. It's because of the superfluous semicolon. I'll file a clang-format bug for
this, though I'd argue this is pretty poor style to begin with.

[dcheng, 2014-10-27 22:06:25]

PTAL, I really fixed the formatting error this time too.

[nasko, 2014-10-27 22:20:49]

LGTM

[dcheng, 2014-10-27 22:24:10]

The CQ bit was checked by dcheng@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-27 22:27:56]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/678073006/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-28 01:13:57]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-28 01:14:30]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/fa85b15991d5df67e3adf18a46a1c0fdca163568
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#301534}