subject:"\[Bug libstdc\+\+\/18644\] \[3.3\/3.4\/4.0 regression\] \-Wsynth warning in complex"

[Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-30 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-30 17:03 --- Yo thanks G. Wolfgang, the whole implications of adding copy ctors changing calling conventions was not clear to me either, before the -Weffc++ changes. There was some discussion of this at that time, and

[Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-30 Thread bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu 2004-11-30 17:06 --- Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex I'd like to re-assign this to a g++ bug, or middle end or whatever. Sound like a plan? Yes, certainly. I guess it's a front-end

[Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-27 Thread gdr at integrable-solutions dot net

--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2004-11-27 21:27 --- Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Why are we getting this warning anyway? I don't know why we're getting that

Re: [Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-26 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis

bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | The diagnostic is nonsensical. The fix is to fix the diagnostic, not | to paper over the problem. | | That's certainly the best solution. -Wsynth should just not trigger in | libstdc++ headers. yes, and even more in user codes

[Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-26 Thread gdr at integrable-solutions dot net

--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2004-11-26 17:45 --- Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | The diagnostic is nonsensical. The fix is to fix the diagnostic,

[Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-25 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-25 16:38 --- Gaby can you look at this? Adding the copy ctor here will change ABI, so not super likely. Why are we getting this warning anyway? -benjamin -- What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-25 Thread bangerth at dealii dot org

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-11-25 19:19 --- I am not an expert in ABI questions, but in my naive world constructors are somewhat different than regular functions if they are declared inline (and synthesized constructors always are): - you can't take

[Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-25 Thread gdr at integrable-solutions dot net

--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2004-11-26 03:16 --- Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex bangerth at dealii dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | I am not an expert in ABI questions, but in my naive world constructors | are

[Bug libstdc++/18644] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex

2004-11-25 Thread bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu

--- Additional Comments From bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu 2004-11-26 04:33 --- Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] -Wsynth warning in complex The issue is not taking the address of the copy constructor, but the change in calling convention. It you declare a copy