------- Comment #29 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-16 18:54 ------- (In reply to comment #27) > From libstdc++ perspective, __imag__ ought to be an lvalue. This is a recurent > issue for C++ complex<>.
Of course the lvalue is moot, I never said __imag__ should not be lvalue, I don't know where Mark gets that from (maybe it is because I was showing why the warning is correct or something I don't know). >From the C perspective the warning is correct as you are loading piece wise which is not really supported at all, even shown by my integer testcase. As I said before __imag__ a should be an lvalue but __imag__ a = b is equivalent to a = COMPLEX < REAL<a>, b> there is nothing from any point of view doing it this way. Also I should note that __imag__ being around is an extension, a not so well documented one at that. So changing this to behavior this way is well defined. And if you look and you will see that now we actually perform a lot more optimizations on complex unlike before when we split it up. (this is also in reference to RTH's comments in comment #24). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23497
