--- Additional Comments From sven at clio dot in-berlin dot de 2005-05-17
11:42 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Over my dead body. :-)
Oh, come on. It isn't that bad an idea to localize substitution failures,
isn't it:-)
> -- Gaby
Sven
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-05-16 19:19 ---
Subject: Re: Possible bug
"sven at clio dot in-berlin dot de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| (In reply to comment #7)
| > > Is there a way to distinguish between unions (which are not usable as
base
--- Additional Comments From sven at clio dot in-berlin dot de 2005-05-16
10:22 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> > Is there a way to distinguish between unions (which are not usable as base
> > classes) and classes? If not, the standard is incomplete.
>
> You should know that 10 year
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-15 15:03
---
> Is there a way to distinguish between unions (which are not usable as base
> classes) and classes? If not, the standard is incomplete.
You should know that 10 years ago people didn't even imagine the kind of
te
--- Additional Comments From sven at clio dot in-berlin dot de 2005-05-15
14:46 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Extensions are bad. Even just bugs in the compiler is a bad thing beause
> people would think the bug
> was an extension and start depending on it and then when the bug w
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-15
14:12 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> If there is no other way to distinguish reliable between unions and classes,
> add it into the extension list. Unions should be avoided in object oriented
> design, anyway, but i
--- Additional Comments From sven at clio dot in-berlin dot de 2005-05-15
14:08 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The code is invalid. In the section 14.8.2 [temp.deduct] paragraph 2 of the
> standard
> does not include creating a class with invalid base class.
If there is no other w
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-15
12:37 ---
The code is invalid. In the section 14.8.2 [temp.deduct] paragraph 2 of the
standard
does not include creating a class with invalid base class. Examples of valid
SNINF cases:
- Attempting to create an arr
--- Additional Comments From sven at clio dot in-berlin dot de 2005-05-12
09:48 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I don't think you used SFINF correctly.
The substitution of the formal parameter with the actual argument fails, thus
it is a form of substitution failure. I do not know,
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-11
11:10 ---
I don't think you used SFINF correctly.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21510
10 matches
Mail list logo
