Package and virtual functions

[BLM768]

>
> override will eventually be required when overriding a 
> function. It is already
> if you compile with -w but not yet all of the time - though 
> since protected
> isn't virtual and isn't really overriding anything, the 
> compiler doesn't
> complain if you don't use override with it (though it will if 
> you do, since
> it's not overriding anything). So, eventually (or now if you 
> use -w), you will
> _always_ know whether a function is overiding another or not, 
> because it will
> have to have override if it is and can't have it if it isn't.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

That's good to know. I'll start using -w from now on.
However, the problem still exists that if a function is meant to 
override a virtual method, but the method is not actually 
virtual, and the programmer forgets to type "override," the 
compiler won't complain and the error will slip through.