Re: [pgadmin-hackers] pgadmin3 not compliant with gcc-3.4 (?)

[Andreas Pflug]

Well,
seems GCC 3.4 isn't compliant with C++...
Raphaėl Enrici wrote:
 >     EVT_CHECKBOX(XRCID("chkEnabled"),               dlgJob::OnChange)
 >     EVT_COMBOBOX(XRCID("cbJobclass"),               dlgJob::OnChange)
There's no dlgJob::OnChange. I'd consider it accidentially if a compiler 
accepts that or not. If I'd like the compiler to take "the nearest 
method accessible in this context" I wouldn't specify the classname.

As far as I understand, we sometime refer directly to a method declared 
as protected in dlgProperty although we sometime (not always) inherit 
from it. Declaring friends classes or public method would solve the 
problem, but I'm quite sure that it was not made for some good reason.
We *always* inherit property dialogs from dlgProperty. OnChange is to be 
used by dlgProperty and classes derived from it only, so it's very 
correct to declare it protected.

I've found some information in the changes from gcc 3.4 which tend to 
tell that the compiler has changed the way it handles such situation and 
 ask to refer to the subclass and not the top class. Maybe it's a way to 
follow ?
(I've seen that it talks about pointer, but isn't BEGIN_EVENT_TABLE 
playing with pointer internally ?)
Yes.

    class A
    {
    public:
      void pub_func();
    protected:
      void prot_func();
    private:
      void priv_func();
    };
    class B : public A
    {
    public:
      void foo()
      {
        &A::pub_func;   // OK, pub_func is accessible through A
        &A::prot_func;  // error, cannot access prot_func through A
        &A::priv_func;  // error, cannot access priv_func through A
        &B::pub_func;   // OK, pub_func is accessible through B
        &B::prot_func;  // OK, can access prot_func through B (within B)
        &B::priv_func;  // error, cannot access priv_func through B
      }
    };
This is plain crazy. So I may call A::prot_func(), but not retrieve it's 
address? What if I also have a B::prot_func?

Sorry, this is a *bug*.
Regards,
Andreas
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
     subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
     message can get through to the mailing list cleanly