2008/6/20 Mark Mitchell:
>
>> Shall I commit this?
>
> Yes, please.
Thanks, Mark, I've committed it.
Volker, all the problems you noticed should be fixed, if you find any
other cases that seem wrong please let me know.
Cheers,
Jonathan
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Thanks for the review, here's another patch ...
Shall I commit this?
Yes, please.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Jonathan Wakely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/6/18 Mark Mitchell:
>>> * I don't think the pedwarn in joust() in cp/call.c should be a
>>> permerror, is this a GNU extension?
>>> if (warn)
>>>{
>>> pedwarn ("\
>>> ISO C++ says th
Thanks for the review, here's another patch ...
2008/6/18 Mark Mitchell:
>
>> * Should it really be a hard error for a class to declare itself as a
>> friend? I don't think it's expressly forbidden
>> e.g. class A { friend class A; };
>> I changed this to a permerror, restoring the old behaviour.
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
2008/6/18 Mark Mitchell:
* I don't think the pedwarn in joust() in cp/call.c should be a
permerror, is this a GNU extension?
if (warn)
{
pedwarn ("\
ISO C++ says that these are ambiguous, even \
though the worst conversion for the first is
2008/6/18 Mark Mitchell:
>> * I don't think the pedwarn in joust() in cp/call.c should be a
>> permerror, is this a GNU extension?
>> if (warn)
>>{
>> pedwarn ("\
>> ISO C++ says that these are ambiguous, even \
>> though the worst conversion for the first is bette
2008/6/18 Mark Mitchell:
> Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>> Could a C++ maintainer please review this patch to turn most pedwarns
>> into permerrors.
>
> This patch is OK, with minor nits below. Thanks for working on this!
Thanks Mark, I'll submit a revised patch this evening.
Jonathan
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Could a C++ maintainer please review this patch to turn most pedwarns
into permerrors.
This patch is OK, with minor nits below. Thanks for working on this!
The interesting cases are:
* when 'main' is declared without a return type. I split one case into
a permerror an
2008/6/12 Jonathan Wakely:
> 2008/6/11 Volker Reichelt:
>> * Scopes in for-loops:
>>
>> void foo()
>> {
>>for (int i=0; i<10; ++i) {}
>>i = 0;
>> }
>>
>> warn.cc: In function 'void foo()':
>> warn.cc:4: warning: name lookup of 'i' changed for new ISO 'for' scoping
>> warn.cc:3: warnin
2008/6/16 Jonathan Wakely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 2008/6/13 Mark Mitchell:
>> Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Volker, thanks for picking these issues up. I told Manuel I'd
>>> review the rest of the remaining pedwarns, but haven't had time to do
>>> it either.
>>
>> Just to chime in here: Volker,
Jonathan --
Thanks for pushing this forward!
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
On Jun 15, 2008, at 7:06 PM, "Jonathan Wakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
2008/6/13 Mark Mitchell:
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Hi Volker, thanks for picking these issues up. I tol
2008/6/13 Mark Mitchell:
> Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> Hi Volker, thanks for picking these issues up. I told Manuel I'd
>> review the rest of the remaining pedwarns, but haven't had time to do
>> it either.
>
> Just to chime in here: Volker, I agree with your comments.
I think we all do :-)
> Jo
2008/6/13 Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> Hi Volker, thanks for picking these issues up. I told Manuel I'd
>> review the rest of the remaining pedwarns, but haven't had time to do
>> it either.
>
> Just to chime in here: Volker, I agree with your comments.
>
> Jona
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Hi Volker, thanks for picking these issues up. I told Manuel I'd
review the rest of the remaining pedwarns, but haven't had time to do
it either.
Just to chime in here: Volker, I agree with your comments.
Jonathan, Manuel, if you would please make the time to finish this
Hi Volker, thanks for picking these issues up. I told Manuel I'd
review the rest of the remaining pedwarns, but haven't had time to do
it either.
2008/6/11 Volker Reichelt:
> * Scopes in for-loops:
>
> void foo()
> {
>for (int i=0; i<10; ++i) {}
>i = 0;
> }
>
> warn.cc: In function 'vo
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 04:12:18PM +0200, Volker Reichelt wrote:
> * Scopes in for-loops:
>
> void foo()
> {
> for (int i=0; i<10; ++i) {}
> i = 0;
> }
>
> warn.cc: In function 'void foo()':
> warn.cc:4: warning: name lookup of 'i' changed for new ISO 'for' scoping
> warn.cc:3
2008/6/11 Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Volker Reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> since Manuel's patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00962.html
>> a lot of C++ code is now accepted on mainline (when compiling without
>> special flags like -fpermissive and -pedantic),
Volker Reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> since Manuel's patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00962.html
> a lot of C++ code is now accepted on mainline (when compiling without
> special flags like -fpermissive and -pedantic), that used to be rejected.
> Instead of getting closer
Hi,
since Manuel's patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00962.html
a lot of C++ code is now accepted on mainline (when compiling without
special flags like -fpermissive and -pedantic), that used to be rejected.
Instead of getting closer to the standard we get away from it, which is a
19 matches
Mail list logo
