On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 07:34:30AM -0600, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Matthias Klose <d...@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> > Am 07.12.2012 06:05, schrieb Jason Merrill:
>> >> It's perfectly OK to initialize a base class of abstract type; it's only
>> >> an
>> >> error to create a full object of such a type. So this patch moves the
>> >> check
>> >> from more generic initialization code out into a function that's
>> >> definitely
>> >> creating a new object.
>> >>
>> >> Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk and 4.7.
>> >
>> > this doesn't build on the branch:
>> >
>> > ../gcc/cp/tree.c: In function 'build_aggr_init_expr':
>> > ../gcc/cp/tree.c:399:1: error: parameter name omitted
>> >
>> > this fixes the bootstrap, currently running the testsuite.
>> >
>> > --- cp/tree.c~ 2012-12-07 10:01:16.665415647 +0100
>> > +++ cp/tree.c 2012-12-07 10:11:01.373410862 +0100
>> > @@ -396,7 +396,8 @@
>> > callable. */
>> >
>> > tree
>> > -build_aggr_init_expr (tree type, tree init, tsubst_flags_t /*complain*/)
>> > +build_aggr_init_expr (tree type, tree init,
>> > + tsubst_flags_t complain ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>> > {
>> > tree fn;
>> > tree slot;
>> >
>>
>> We should definitely teach the compiler to accept the former and not
>> be silly in requiring the latter when C++.
>
> Except that GCC 4.7 doesn't mandate building with C++, so the sources must
> be valid C.
>
> Jakub
Right you are!
Thanks,
-- Gaby
