Hi Marek, On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Marek Polacek wrote: > +The additional overloads can cause the compiler to reject invalid code that > +was accepted before. An example of such code is the below:
which additional overloads does this refer to? > +#include <stdlib.h> > +int > +foo (unsigned x) Usually I'd merge the two lines above to make the example shorter (even if that then does not meet the GNU Coding Standards), but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. ;-) > +Since calling <code>abs()</code> on an unsigned value doesn't make sense, > +this code will become explicitly invalid as per discussion in the LWG. How is this related to overloads? I feel there is some tacit knowledge involved, which I and presuambly many of our users may be lacking? > +<h3>Links</h3> Did you mean to add anything here? Right now it's still empty. Gerald PS: I applied the small markup/formatting patch below. Index: gcc-6/porting_to.html =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html,v retrieving revision 1.13 diff -u -r1.13 porting_to.html --- gcc-6/porting_to.html 12 Feb 2016 16:28:27 -0000 1.13 +++ gcc-6/porting_to.html 14 Feb 2016 13:11:43 -0000 @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ <code>std::terminate</code>. By default GCC will now issue a warning for throw-expressions in <code>noexcept</code> functions, including destructors, that would immediately result in a call to terminate. The new warning can be -disabled with <tt>-Wno-terminate</tt>. It is possible to restore the old +disabled with <code>-Wno-terminate</code>. It is possible to restore the old behavior when defining the destructor like this: </p> <pre><code> @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ the C++ standard library. </p> -<h4>Call of overloaded 'abs(unsigned int&)' is ambiguous</h4> +<h4>Call of overloaded '<code>abs(unsigned int&)</code>' is ambiguous</h4> <p> The additional overloads can cause the compiler to reject invalid code that @@ -391,8 +391,9 @@ <h2>Enhanced <code>-Wnonnull</code></h2> <p> The <code>-Wnonnull</code> warning has been improved so that it also warns -about comparing parameters declared as nonnull with <code>NULL</code>. For -example, the compiler will warn about the following code: +about comparing parameters declared as <code>nonnull</code> with +<code>NULL</code>. For example, the compiler will warn about the +following code: </p> <pre><code>
