[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2008-02-14 Thread jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-14 23:11 --- Subject: Bug 5645 Author: jason Date: Thu Feb 14 23:11:04 2008 New Revision: 132324 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=132324 Log: PR c++/5645 PR c++/11159 * class.c

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2008-02-14 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-14 23:39 --- Fixed in GCC 4.3 per Jason's commit. Not worth fixing it in branches. -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2008-02-13 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-13 11:13 --- *** Bug 11159 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2008-02-13 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-13 11:23 --- Created an attachment (id=15136) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15136action=view) patch and testcases This patch contains an attempt to implement the suggestions given here:

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2008-02-13 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-13 11:38 --- Created an attachment (id=15137) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15137action=view) patch and testcases Correct patch, the previous one did not contain pr11159.C -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2007-11-14 Thread jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2007-11-14 13:38 --- Isn't this warning simply bogus? In other contexts if a default constructor is available it will be used without warning, whether explicitly used or not. e.g. non-virtual bases in constructor initializer lists

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2007-10-29 Thread patchapp at dberlin dot org
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-10-30 03:46 --- Subject: Bug number PR c++/5645 A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker. The mailing list url for the patch is http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-10/msg01639.html --

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2007-10-18 Thread nathan at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #5 from nathan at codesourcery dot com 2007-10-18 09:43 --- Subject: Re: gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized manu at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-17 11:26 --- Does this patch makes

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2007-10-17 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-17 11:26 --- Does this patch makes any sense? This needs testcases (suggestions for extra testcases are welcome), Changelog, bootstrap + testing and proper submission. --- init.c 2007-09-20 15:13:00.0 +0100 +++

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2007-02-09 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-09 14:02 --- Is this a duplicate of PR 11159 or are they different? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5645

[Bug c++/5645] gcc warns that pure virtual class not explicitly initialized

2005-06-19 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Last reconfirmed|2004-04-26 19:41:58 |2005-06-20 04:06:31 date|