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

[Raphaƫl Enrici]

Andreas Pflug wrote:
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)
<snip>
    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*.
Seems gcc team does not agree...
Can you take a look at these please and tell what you understand ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15308
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11174
They are the ones coming to the conclusion quoted before.
Can you tell me where I can find the C++ spec they are all talking about 
please ?

Regards,
Raphaėl
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend