C++ “virtual” keyword for functions in derived classes. Is it necessary?

Question

With the struct definition given below...

struct A {
    virtual void hello() = 0;
};

Approach #1:

struct B : public A {
           


        

Answer 1

The 'virtualness' of a function is propagated implicitly, however at least one compiler I use will generate a warning if the virtual keyword is not used explicitly, so you may want to use it if only to keep the compiler quiet.

From a purely stylistic point-of-view, including the virtual keyword clearly 'advertises' the fact to the user that the function is virtual. This will be important to anyone further sub-classing B without having to check A's definition. For deep class hierarchies, this becomes especially important.