This warning exists in clang and warns about fields in classes shadowing
fields in base classes. I hit one bug that this warning would have
caught. I don't think there are many legitimate / useful cases to have
derived and base classes with fields of the same name.
Change-Id: Ifab0bc03bce2b84a4a186fcc98da8b68ef61e771
Signed-off-by: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.lttng.org/c/babeltrace/+/8514
Tested-by: jenkins <jenkins@lttng.org>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Proulx <eeppeliteloop@gmail.com>
dnl Clang's does not. Enable Clang's `-Wshadow-field-in-constructor`, to make
dnl Clang warn about that.
-Wshadow-field-in-constructor dnl
+ -Wshadow-field dnl
-Wjump-misses-init dnl
-Wsuggest-attribute=format dnl
-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare dnl