https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69020
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2017-08-25
CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
> I agree, but as long as the feature is exposed to users it seems that it
> should work in unsurprising ways (i.e., follow the C++ lookup rules).
> Otherwise, if we don't want C++ programmers to use it, a possible simple fix
> is to reject the attribute in C++. Alternatively, we could reject it when
> the referenced function is dependent to keep it working in the cases we know
> work correctly and prevent unexpected results in the others. Or we can fix
> it and issue a warning suggesting to use a destructor. I'm fine with any of
> these solutions and I'm happy to work up a patch (in fact, I already started
> working on it hoping for a simple fix).
Confirmed, I'd prefer the solution of issuing a warning
