Semicolons at the end of member function definitions

[Dirk Mueller]

On Tuesday, 31. July 2007, Volker Reichelt wrote:

> Therefore, IMHO the patch is wrong and should be reverted.
> Or am I missing something?

I don't have access to a newer version of the language standard either. I 
couldn't find a different case that is comparable to this one either (for 
example, we handle the difference between an enumerator list with a 
trailing ',' and a initializer list with a trailing ',' - although that is 
equally counter-intuitive). 

So, assuming that this hasn't changed in a newer standard then I guess you're 
right and the check should only be a warning with -pedantic, (and 
no -pedantic-errors) given. This is however not implementable currently. As I 
don't know why -pedantic-errors is on by default for C++ (but not for C), the 
only possibility I see is indeed to revert this patch and add a 
comment/testcase. 


Greetings,
Dirk