[Bug c++/33801] Missing warning: "type qualifiers are meaningless in this declaration"

2011-10-22 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33801 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug c++/33801] Missing warning: "type qualifiers are meaningless in this declaration"

2011-10-22 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33801 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Missing warning |Missing warning: "type

[Bug c++/33801] Missing warning

2010-07-06 Thread paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-07-06 18:18 --- Sorry about the delay. The warning emitted by current ICC by default is exactly: 33801.C(10): warning #21: type qualifiers are meaningless in this declaration f(const typename C::const_reference value)

[Bug c++/33801] Missing warning

2010-07-06 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-06 17:34 --- 3 years in waiting... I am closing this, we have too many real bugs open to worry about. -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug c++/33801] Missing warning

2010-02-20 Thread bangerth at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2010-02-21 01:27 --- I don't see what should be warned about. The 'const' in the signature of 'f' has no effect here, but it also doesn't hurt -- its presence or absence simply doesn't make a difference. W. -- bangerth at gmail dot com c

[Bug c++/33801] Missing warning

2010-02-20 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-21 01:06 --- What does EDG say? What is the problem? This bug summary is too vague. -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/33801] Missing warning

2007-10-17 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
-- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Keywords||diagnostic htt