[Bug libstdc++/90135] std::map::at incorrectly included in C++03 mode

2019-04-18 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90135 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Gaul --- I understand; thank you for sharing this background.

[Bug libstdc++/90135] New: std::map::at incorrectly included in C++03 mode

2019-04-18 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gcc at gaul dot org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 46191 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46191&action=edit Do not include std::map::at before C++11 This was introduced in C++11:

[Bug c/45821] no warning when returning a local variable address within a statement expression

2010-09-28 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45821 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Gaul 2010-09-28 17:51:21 UTC --- The web form truncates all my attachedments at 244 bytes. Here is the source inline: /* * GCC warns about returning a local variable address within a function but not * within a stat

[Bug c/45821] New: no warning when returning a local variable address within a statement expression

2010-09-28 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45821 Summary: no warning when returning a local variable address within a statement expression Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priorit

[Bug c++/39554] -Wdisallowed-function-list fails when #including

2009-03-26 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
--- Comment #4 from gcc at gaul dot org 2009-03-26 20:39 --- Thanks, r145094 fixed my problem! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39554

[Bug c++/39554] New: -Wdisallowed-function-list fails when #including

2009-03-25 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
hen #including Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: gcc at gaul dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s

[Bug c++/39089] -Wconversion is buggy with bitwise operators

2009-02-03 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
--- Comment #3 from gcc at gaul dot org 2009-02-03 18:57 --- After talking with Oleg, there are differences between gcc and g++ compiling the code in comment #2: $ g++ --version g++ (GCC) 4.3.0 Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for

[Bug c++/39089] -Wconversion is buggy with bitwise operators

2009-02-03 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
--- Comment #2 from gcc at gaul dot org 2009-02-03 18:40 --- Original description is not quite accurate, the or operator does not cause a spurious warning while the and operator does. Here is a more minimal test case: void func(char a, char b, char c) { c = a | b; c = a &am

[Bug c++/31843] -Wformat-nonliteral differs between gcc and g++

2007-05-06 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
--- Comment #1 from gcc at gaul dot org 2007-05-06 08:10 --- Created an attachment (id=13515) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13515&action=view) -Wformat-nonliteral test case -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31843

[Bug c++/31843] New: -Wformat-nonliteral differs between gcc and g++

2007-05-06 Thread gcc at gaul dot org
ReportedBy: gcc at gaul dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31843