------- 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

Reply via email to