--- Comment #14 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-13 17:53
---
*** Bug 44528 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-20 17:53
---
*** Bug 44215 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-31 00:14
---
*** Bug 43594 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #11 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-08 09:48 ---
*** Bug 42330 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42101
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-08 09:18
---
*** Bug 42330 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-01 17:07 ---
*** Bug 42241 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-19 09:38
---
It is basic, yes, a point worth making with people insisting that we do have a
serious bug, thus reopening the PR at will, without trusting the competence of
the maintainers and wasting some of our time.
--
--- Comment #7 from andhow at gmail dot com 2009-11-19 02:41 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> This is pretty basic C++, by the way.
Mmm hmm. SO basic that it warranted special clarification in 9.4.2-4:
"The member shall still be defined in a namespace scope if it is used in the
program
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-11-19 02:16
---
It doesn't have any definition, it does have a *declaration*. This is pretty
basic C++, by the way. Just add out of class:
const size_t X::DEPENDENT_LENGTH_MASK;
...
...
and everything will be fine. The
--- Comment #5 from dvander at alliedmods dot net 2009-11-19 01:58 ---
I'll also note that the compiler seems to accept it, as I get a .o file. The
linking step botches.
--
dvander at alliedmods dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from andhow at gmail dot com 2009-11-19 01:53 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > You don't have a definition of the static const variable which you need for
> > this to be valid C++.
Heh, oops, hit 'Commit' accidentally.
This example does have a
--- Comment #3 from andhow at gmail dot com 2009-11-19 01:52 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> You don't have a definition of the static const variable which you need for
> this to be valid C++.
--
andhow at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-19 01:46 ---
You don't have a definition of the static const variable which you need for
this to be valid C++.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from dvander at alliedmods dot net 2009-11-19 01:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=19039)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19039&action=view)
reduced test case
This program doesn't link, though it should.
keima:src dvander$ g++ test.cpp -o test
test.cpp
14 matches
Mail list logo
