https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64117
--- Comment #2 from Oren Ben-Kiki ---
Problem persists in gcc 5.2. Sigh.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64117
Oren Ben-Kiki changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.8.2 |4.9.2
--- Comment #1 from Oren Ben-Kiki
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-o...@ben-kiki.org
Created attachment 34140
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34140&action=edit
A header file, a source file, and a RUNME scrip
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16168
--- Comment #10 from Oren Ben-Kiki ---
All good points, which you could say about many opened bugs.
The `-Weffc++` flag is a useful tool to keep large code bases working, even
when written by less-than-guru C++ programmers. As someone tending a l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16168
--- Comment #8 from o...@ben-kiki.org ---
Well... it does provide some really useful stuff.
I think it is reasonable to expect that as long as -Weffc++ is in the
compiler, it should make sense, and this specific behavior doesn't. If it
has
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16168
Oren Ben-Kiki changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-o...@ben-kiki.org
--- Comment #6
