https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||antoshkka at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Marc Mutz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marc at kdab dot com
--- Comment #15 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
--- Comment #14 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
*** Bug 71985 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nico at josuttis dot de
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mgsergio at yandex dot ru
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-22
00:06:50 UTC ---
With -std=c++11, -Wno-narrowing suppresses the diagnostic required by the
standard. Note that this does not affect the meaning of well-formed code;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
--- Comment #2 from David Sankel david at stellarscience dot com 2012-12-22
00:13:33 UTC ---
From what I understand, the standard requires the compiler to reject the
program, not to accept it with a warning.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-22
00:15:04 UTC ---
use -Werror=Wnarrowing then
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-22
00:27:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
The standard only requires that a conforming implementation shall issue at
least one diagnostic message
(This is from 1.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
--- Comment #6 from David Sankel david at stellarscience dot com 2012-12-22
00:33:44 UTC ---
I suppose which gnu extensions are, by default, enabled in the -std=c++11 mode
is up for debate (one which I have no interest in). However, this program
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
--- Comment #7 from David Sankel david at stellarscience dot com 2012-12-22
00:42:35 UTC ---
I just realized my above comment doesn't make much sense regarding the
standard. Please disregard. On the other hand it seems like -pedantic should
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55783
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
16 matches
Mail list logo
