------- Comment #33 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2008-01-07 08:10 ------- Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types for ?: with "complex type" conversion
"mark at codesourcery dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with incompatible types | for ?: with "complex type" conversion | | gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu wrote: | | > | Is it conceivable that ISO C++ will ever add a | > | complex<double>::complex(int) constructor that doesn't set the real part | > | to the value of the argument (converted to double), and the imaginary | > | part to zero? | > | > That isn't the issue. My concern is whether ISO C++ will ever | > change conversion rules, say from integers to floats or doubles. The | > answer is likely. | | What's the likely change? Ban implicit narrowing conversions, in the sense that a round trip will not give the same value back. The exact rules are in flux (there was a specification discussed at the last Kona meeting, but it got changed based on feedback, and may likely change from now to Sophia Antipolis meeting). However, the general idea meets consensus. -- Gaby -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31780
