------- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 20:53
-------
Paolo --
I didn't realize that something like "__real__ 3" was valid GNU C; I thought
that the argument had to have complex type. But, it looks like that is not the
case.
Given that, yes, I think the test case should be accepted, as a GNU extension.
When __real__ (or __imag__) is applied to an expression with class type, we
should see if the expression can be converted to any of the built-in types to
which __real__ can ordinarily be applied. If there is only one such type, then
we should use that conversion; if there is more than one, then we should report
the same kind of error used when we have an ambiguous overload. I don't think
we should be trying to deduce anything from the context in which the __real__
expression is being used.
So, your patch looks like a fine start. I'm not sure what it will do for cases
like:
struct A {
operator int();
operator __complex__ double();
template <typename T> operator __complex__ T();
};
though. As above, I think those cases should be errors, since there's no way
to know which conversion operator to prefer.
-- Mark
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28501
