------- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-09 02:47 ------- Of course, in C++, A would have a default constructor, since no constructor was explicitly declared. But, is a Java type not supposed to have a constructor in this case? If not, why not? That seems fundamentally at odds with C++; it would be more C++-ful, if we want to prevent construction, to have a declared constructor -- but make it both undefined and private?
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P3 |P2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30293