[Bug c++/42470] New: Conversion Constructor not accepted/recognized

2009-12-22 Thread Curatica at gmail dot com
; We believe that Base b2 = 5; should call Base::Base( int ). The same code compiles and executes fine under Microsoft Visual Studio. -- Summary: Conversion Constructor not accepted/recognized Product: gcc Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: Curatica at gmail dot com GCC build triplet: What is this? GCC host triplet: Not sure what this means; here is the result of uname - a: Linux GCC target triplet: What is this? http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42470

[Bug c++/42471] New: No return value from operator =() is accepted by the compiler

2009-12-22 Thread Curatica at gmail dot com
Base b5; b5 = b2; cout << "b5: " << b5 << endl; } int main( int argc, char** argv ) { test1(); } / But the operator =() does not return a value! This error is caught by MS Visual Studio.

[Bug c++/42471] No return value from operator =() is accepted by the compiler

2009-12-24 Thread Curatica at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from Curatica at gmail dot com 2009-12-25 00:08 --- Thanks (not sure what 4.1.0 referred to)... -- Curatica at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/42470] Conversion Constructor not accepted/recognized

2009-12-24 Thread Curatica at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from Curatica at gmail dot com 2009-12-25 02:04 --- Please, understand that for me this is just a disinterested, academic discussion: no offense. I am not sure that I agree with the theory. The standard (8.5.1) states that: T x = a; is a "copy-initialization

[Bug c++/42470] Conversion Constructor not accepted/recognized

2009-12-25 Thread Curatica at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from Curatica at gmail dot com 2009-12-25 21:11 --- Whatever... -- Curatica at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED

[Bug c++/42470] Conversion Constructor not accepted/recognized

2009-12-25 Thread Curatica at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from Curatica at gmail dot com 2009-12-25 21:12 --- Whatever... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42470