seznam dot cz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40733
--- Comment #2 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-13 20:57 ---
-Wall has a very misleading name and should probably be changed to match the
MSC behaviour (enable all warnings available).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40733
--- Comment #4 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-14 08:37 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> and with integer promotion happening with simple stuff like a + b,
> some folks will have a hard time to understand that happens which
> is why it is not enabled with -Wall.
The w
--- Comment #7 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-14 15:13 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> -Wconversion hits extremely often, it is definitely not a warning that can or
> should be enabled in -Wall, nor in -W.
>
The fact that "it hits often" should not be
--- Comment #8 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-14 15:31 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
>
> As for Wall, we have users requesting less warnings from Wall and users
> requesting more. We try to find a balance. But you are free to suggest that
> existing warnings be move
--- Comment #10 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-14 18:11 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
>
> So your definition of -Wall is not very useful at all and will be even more
> misleading to users or why the warnings are happening.
>
MSC's /Wall enables all warnings an
ummary: -Wconversion generates false warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: photon at seznam dot cz
--- Comment #6 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-15 07:50 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Theses are not false warnings:
> c >>= 1;
>
> is really c = (int)c >> 1;
They are false warnings. The implicit conversion cannot alter the value.
--
htt
--- Comment #7 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-15 07:54 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Then, let's keep this around as an enhancement request.
>
I think this is actually a bug as the specification of the warning is: Warn for
implicit conversions that may alter a val
--- Comment #11 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-15 16:55 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> For:
>
> c += (char) 1;
>
> The value can change as you have a wrapping if c is CHAR_MAX.
>
> Likewise with:
> c += c2;
>
The value cannot change
--- Comment #14 from photon at seznam dot cz 2009-07-15 18:24 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Or rather from SCHAR_MAX + 1 to SCHAR_MIN :). Since it is 0x7F + 1 ==
> (int)0x80. So we have a negative value now from a positive value.
>
This occurs regardless of the implicit c
--
photon at seznam dot cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|enhancement |normal
Summary|-Wconversion: do not warn |-Wconversion
Summary: Reassignment of a reference to a polymorphic class fails
at runtime
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned a
--- Comment #2 from photon at seznam dot cz 2007-09-18 12:01 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> No, "B" is correct.
>
>
> A &Aref = Binst;
> Aref = Cinst;
>
> is the same as:
> Binst = (A)Cinst;
>
"Binst = (A)Cin
--- Comment #3 from photon at seznam dot cz 2007-09-18 15:12 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> No, "B" is correct.
>
>
> A &Aref = Binst;
> Aref = Cinst;
>
> is the same as:
> Binst = (A)Cinst;
>
The compiler treats this ca
cc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: photon at seznam dot cz
GCC host triplet: Ubuntu Linux 7.04
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33754
--- Comment #2 from photon at seznam dot cz 2007-10-13 08:24 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 57 ***
>
>> I should note this bug is suspended. This is because the standard is
>> unclear at what is the correct beha
--- Comment #5 from photon at seznam dot cz 2007-10-15 07:29 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> DR 325 describes the ambiguities in the standard. There are a number of
> possible solutions to accepting this syntax, with different implementation
> complexities, and it is not clear
--- Comment #7 from photon at seznam dot cz 2007-10-16 09:23 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
>
> What are your thoughts about the other issues raised by 325?
>
The suggested resolution disregards the syntactical needs of templates and
makes 'int Foo (int i = T<1, int>
--- Comment #18 from photon at seznam dot cz 2010-06-12 16:46 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> The patch was rejected but it may be accepted by using a new -Wno-* option to
> disable these warnings. Perhaps -Wno-conversion-after-promotion?
>
> Suggestions are welcome.
>
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: photon at seznam dot cz
GCC host triplet: Linux OpenSuse 10.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33980
21 matches
Mail list logo
