--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
07:45 ---
I think we are not as bad as before now but I could be wrong.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
06:01 ---
I don't know why this was put in waiting but it should not have been.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
06:02 ---
Reopen it.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRME
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
06:01 ---
Closing as invalid to ...
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
06:00 ---
Still no valid testcase in 3 months so closing.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WA
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
05:58 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
05:41 ---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
05:38 ---
Well it is still a target bug because then you override the
TARGET_SCALAR_MODE_SUPPORTED_P to
reject the TI mode.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18347
--- Additional Comments From hp at bitrange dot com 2004-11-13 05:36
---
Subject: Re: [3.4/4.0 regression] mmix-knuth-mmixware
testsuite failure: gcc.dg/uninit-C.c
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu do
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
05:35 ---
*** Bug 18459 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
05:35 ---
This is the normal static linking "bug", aka PR 13708.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 13708 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
05:25 ---
Because that is what the testcase is testing :).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18347
gcc version 4.0.0 20041113 (experimental)
I produce a cross compiler as I normally do. Host is linux, target is
i686-pc-mingw32, and create a simple test class and compile:
public class test {
public static void main(String[] sa) {
System.out.println("H. World");
}
}
i686-pc-mingw32-gcj --m
--- Additional Comments From hp at bitrange dot com 2004-11-13 01:25
---
Subject: Re: [3.4/4.0 regression] mmix-knuth-mmixware
testsuite failure: gcc.dg/uninit-C.c
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu d
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
00:33 ---
A reduced testcase is the following:
template void foo();
template > struct A
{
template A(T);
};
A<> a(0);
The bug
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13
00:05 ---
> Rerunning the bootstrap on 20041105 with s10_70 (i.e. the first build
> supporting AMD64, but still running in 32-bit mode for the moment), the
> same problems also affects c94002g, c953002, and c954022.
--- Additional Comments From dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
2004-11-12 23:59 ---
See also:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg00938.html
to get fixincl.exe to actually work
Danny
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18458
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
23:19 ---
Created an attachment (id=7537)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7537&action=view)
patch which should work
Could you test this patch for me, it is an obvious patch?
--
What
fixincl is missing the ".exe" when building a native win32 compiler from a cross
compiler.
"make install"
/bin/sh /datal/gcc/gcc/mkinstalldirs /datal/gcc/build/wingcc
/datal/gcc/build/wingcc
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/gcc/build/wingcc_build/fastjar'
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/gc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
23:03 ---
This is definitely a target bug, mmix_function_outgoing_value does not support
TI mode at all.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From Jean-Paul dot Chaput at lip6 dot fr
2004-11-12 22:52 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Not a bug, templates do really get added to namespaces by using if
Sorry to bother you again but there's something I don't get.
Forget about template, it was an additionnal
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:58 ---
Fixed in GCC 3.4.4.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:58 ---
Fixed in GCC 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RE
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:58 ---
Fixed in GCC 3.4.4.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:57 ---
Subject: Bug 18407
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:57:31
Modified files:
gcc/cp : decl.c
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:57 ---
Fixed in GCC 3.4.4.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:57 ---
Subject: Bug 18436
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:57:31
Modified files:
gcc/cp : decl.c
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:57 ---
Subject: Bug 18389
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:57:31
Modified files:
gcc/cp : decl.c
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:47 ---
Subject: Bug 18436
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:47:13
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog decl.c decl2.c parser.c pt.
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:47 ---
Subject: Bug 18429
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:47:13
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog decl.c decl2.c parser.c pt.
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:47 ---
Subject: Bug 18407
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:47:13
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog decl.c decl2.c parser.c pt.
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:47 ---
Subject: Bug 18389
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:47:13
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog decl.c decl2.c parser.c pt.
--- Additional Comments From cmh204 at lehigh dot edu 2004-11-12 21:39
---
After further reflection, this is a problem with my code. Although it is now an
interesting question of why it worked at all in one order.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12 21:29
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:27 ---
Subject: Bug 17778
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:26:55
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
21:15 ---
Subject: Bug 17778
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 21:15:24
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386: f
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
20:16 ---
Not a bug, templates do really get added to namespaces by using if
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet||i486-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18457
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
19:46 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
19:44 ---
Subject: Bug 14264
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 19:43:58
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib: libstdc++.exp
lib
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
19:44 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
19:29 ---
Fixed in 3.4.0, 3.3.x is just on regression fixing mode and since this is most
likely not a regression I am
closing as fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From a_fisch at gmx dot de 2004-11-12 19:20 ---
The Bug is in gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c in function
rs6000_elf_in_small_data_p()
With gcc version 3.4.x? (2003-05-02) the macro SYMBOL_REF_SMALL_P () was
introduced, which checks for a flag, which is not properl
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
19:15 ---
Subject: Bug 18423
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 19:15:25
Modified files:
. : ChangeLog configure.in configure
Lo
--- Additional Comments From sje at cup dot hp dot com 2004-11-12 19:07
---
I have run this testcase with the 3.3.* and 3.4.* and ToT (pre-4.0) compilers on
IA64 linux. The bug exists in all 3.3.* compilers (3.3.[012345]) and none of
the 3.4 compilers (3.4.[0123]). Nor does it happen o
--- Additional Comments From geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
19:04 ---
I have a patch to fix this.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|bonzini at gcc dot gnu
--- Additional Comments From cmh204 at lehigh dot edu 2004-11-12 18:34
---
Created an attachment (id=7535)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7535&action=view)
broken example (file5)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18457
--- Additional Comments From cmh204 at lehigh dot edu 2004-11-12 18:32
---
Created an attachment (id=7534)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7534&action=view)
broken example (file4)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18457
--- Additional Comments From cmh204 at lehigh dot edu 2004-11-12 18:32
---
Created an attachment (id=7533)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7533&action=view)
broken example (file3)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18457
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From cmh204 at lehigh dot edu 2004-11-12 18:31
---
Created an attachment (id=7532)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7532&action=view)
broken example (file2)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18457
--- Additional Comments From cmh204 at lehigh dot edu 2004-11-12 18:30
---
Created an attachment (id=7531)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7531&action=view)
broken example
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18457
Sorry, I do not know what host triplet, target triplet, or build triplet mean.
None of them are discussed in http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html.
Here is the output of gcc -v:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/sandbox/newchords$ gcc -v
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i486-linux/3.3.5/specs
Configured with: ../
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|Legal rejected in gnat |incorrect execution
|3.15p, RM 3.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
17:12 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
17:03 ---
One more patch is required. And libjava problem has to be fixed before this bug
is revisited.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14513
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
17:03 ---
One more patch is required. And libjava problem has to be fixed before this bug
is revisited.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15410
--- Additional Comments From mgd at santafe dot edu 2004-11-12 17:02
---
Created an attachment (id=7530)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7530&action=view)
Objective C file that crashes compiler
Compiling with no -D preprocessor defines will ICE gcc 4.0.0 2
c/gcc
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20041112 (experimental)
--
Summary: ICE compiling Objective C code with protocol-qualified
objects
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
16:58 ---
Patch submitted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg00971.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
16:57 ---
Patch submitted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg00971.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From sje at cup dot hp dot com 2004-11-12 16:54
---
I tried to reproduce this using a native IA64 GCC on Linux and HP-UX and 3.2.3
and 3.3 looked fine to me. I am not sure how to reconcile this with Dara's
results but I think the bug is fixed in 3.2.3 and subsequ
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
16:45 ---
Fixed in GCC 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RE
(Debian bug #280940)
-- RM 3.10(15) "An access value satisfies a composite_constraint
-- of an access subtype if it ... designates an object whose value
-- satisfies the constraint."
with text_io;
procedure Test_131 is
type string_ptr is access all string;
subtype str10 is string_Ptr(1..10
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
16:38 ---
Subject: Bug 18416
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-12 16:37:52
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog passes.c toplev.c
(Debian bug #280939)
-- RM 10.1.5(4) "the pragma shall have an argument that is a name
-- denoting that declaration."
-- RM 8.1(16) "The children of a parent library unit are inside the
-- parent's declarative region."
package pak1 is
pragma Pure;
end pak1;
procedure pak1.p2;
pragma Pure
--- Additional Comments From zak at transversal dot com 2004-11-12 16:33
---
Amended patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg00948.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18300
(Debian bug #279893)
-- legal instantiation rejected; illegal instantiation accepted
-- adapted from John Woodruff c.l.a. post
generic
type T1 is private;
package pak1 is
subtype T3 is T1;
end pak1;
with pak1;
generic
type T2 is private;
package pak2 is
package the_pak1 is new pak1
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
15:35 ---
Note if we change this we have to look at the IV-OPT cost analysis mechanism
and retune it to be more
correct as we will miss some optimizations.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
15:33 ---
The local patch which I had in which caused this was a not so correct for PR
18293 (which we remove
an extra copy RTL as we expand it so it looks like the cost analysis is doing
something wrong which is
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
15:22 ---
Confirmed, the issue is that we are passing the options to the cc1, the
preprocessor (and the C
compiler).
--
What|Removed |Added
--
Using -fno-second-underscore with gfortran gives a spurious warning:
$ gfortran -fno-second-underscore -c common.F90
cc1: warning: command line option "-fno-second-underscore" is valid for F95 but
not for C
--
Summary: -fno-second-underscore induces warning
Product: gcc
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2004-11-12 15:10 ---
Subject: Re: Code for arrays and pointers are not the same
> powerpc-darwin
>
> just -O3
>
> hmm, must be a local modification which changes it.
maybe you are checking 64 bit? That
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
14:53 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
>
> is_gimple_addressable -> is_gimple_id -> is_gimple_variable -> SSA_NAME.
>
> So the correct patch would be
I did post that patch also before it was rejected as I did not look
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
14:52 ---
powerpc-darwin
just -O3
hmm, must be a local modification which changes it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18431
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
14:51 ---
Got it.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |lerdsuwa at
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |nathan at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2004-11-12 14:48 ---
Subject: Re: Code for arrays and pointers are not the same
> huh a compiler built with that patch gives:
> L4:
> slwi r2,r9,1
> addi r9,r9,1
> sthx r0,r2,r11
>
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2004-11-12 14:46 ---
Subject: Re: Code for arrays and pointers are not the same
> > Patch here which should fix not pulling the load of q out of the loop:
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg0
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
14:44 ---
huh a compiler built with that patch gives:
L4:
slwi r2,r9,1
addi r9,r9,1
sthx r0,r2,r11
bdnz L4
Also pulling the load manually out loop also produce the same asm as I just
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2004-11-12 14:42 ---
Subject: Re: Code for arrays and pointers are not the same
> Patch here which should fix not pulling the load of q out of the loop:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg00957
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
14:38 ---
Patch here which should fix not pulling the load of q out of the loop:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg00957.html
Then the only thing left is for IV-OPTS to be fixed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
14:11 ---
*** Bug 18451 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
14:11 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 15946 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Summary|[3.4 Regression] C++ error |C++ error message regression
|mes
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
14:07 ---
Full patch here which does it in the .exp files instead of the makefiles so you
can use runtest also:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-11/msg00953.html
Mine.
--
What|Removed
The following erroneous code gives an error message I do not understand
file.cc:
1 template < class T >
2 class A
3 {
4 public:
5 class B
6 {
7 public:
8 B( int inVal ) : m_i( inVal ) { }
9 int m_i;
10 };
11
--- Additional Comments From megath at iof dot ru 2004-11-12 13:57 ---
thank you.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18448
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Variable with the initial- |[4.0 Regression] Variable
|exec tls-model attribute|with the initial-exec tls-
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Multithreading broken on|[4.0 Regression]
|Unix95-class platforms |Multithreading broken on
|
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
13:54 ---
: Search converges between 2003-07-08-trunk (#288) and 2003-07-09-trunk (#289).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18445
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
13:54 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> > I just says it has to be accessable
> so, if gcc dont use copy ctor - what for it complains ?!
Because this is the requirement of the C++ standard.
> and why is it error btw ?
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
13:51 ---
Confirmed, reduced to:
struct a
{
int what();
};
void g(void*);
template
void f()
{
a ex;
g(ex.what);
}
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From megath at iof dot ru 2004-11-12 13:48 ---
> I just says it has to be accessable
so, if gcc dont use copy ctor - what for it complains ?!
and why is it error btw ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18448
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-12
13:41 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> about
> Copy constructor access check while initializing a reference.
> ? yes. sorry.
> *p = A() constructs copy of object now? what for ?
No we don't contruct a copy of the obj
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
