--- Comment #7 from vonbrand at inf dot utfsm dot cl 2008-02-06 19:12
---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Yes and I just mentioned why this case is incorrect. :)
>
> Anyways we had an "undocumented extension" (which means it was a bug) in GCC
> before 4.2 with this
--- Comment #5 from vonbrand at inf dot utfsm dot cl 2008-02-06 18:25
---
Created an attachment (id=15111)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15111&action=view)
A testcase showing the inconsistency
realf and realg should behave the same, but compiling gives a
--- Comment #4 from vonbrand at inf dot utfsm dot cl 2008-02-06 18:23
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I still don't understand what you are asking? Do you have an example of where
> the differences comes into play? The only one I Know of is taking the address
> of the
--- Comment #2 from vonbrand at inf dot utfsm dot cl 2008-02-06 16:22
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> What are you trying to say?
If I declare:
void f();
void f(int);
or
void f(int i = 100);
should behave exactly the same way. If not, what is the point of offering
defa
to functions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: vonbrand at inf dot utfsm dot cl
GCC host triplet: i386
