http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57205
Bug #: 57205
Summary: unfinished function declaration and inclusion of
assert.h causes compiler errors
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Statu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50330
Bug #: 50330
Summary: Misleading error message with struct declaration
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16663
Rui Maciel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rui.maciel at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50359
Bug #: 50359
Summary: poor error message for an undeclared identifier in
constructor
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50476
Bug #: 50476
Summary: Warn of pointer set to object whose lifetime is
limited
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53281
Bug #: 53281
Summary: poor error message for calling a non-const method from
a const object
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53281
--- Comment #1 from Rui Maciel 2012-05-08
13:27:24 UTC ---
The same suggestion applies to the cases where a non-const method is called
from a const method, such as in the example below:
class Foo {
void bar1() {}
void bar2() con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50359
--- Comment #2 from Rui Maciel 2012-05-08
13:33:57 UTC ---
This issue is still present in g++ 4.6.3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50476
--- Comment #1 from Rui Maciel 2012-05-08
13:35:33 UTC ---
This issue is still present in gcc 4.6.3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50476
--- Comment #3 from Rui Maciel 2012-05-09
11:47:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I think it is only undefined behaviour to access the pointer after the
> life-time of y has finished, however, the following probably isn't, no?
>
> void g()
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53683
Bug #: 53683
Summary: cout doesn't support std::u16string
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53683
--- Comment #2 from Rui Maciel 2012-06-15
13:08:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > If, in the test program, std::u16string is replaced with std::u32string, the
> > program is successfully compiled.
>
> That's surp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53683
--- Comment #7 from Rui Maciel ---
Why is this bug marked as RESOLVED INVALID ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55613
Bug #: 55613
Summary: Better warning for reference to struct type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55767
Bug #: 55767
Summary: flowing off end of function which returns a value
isn't treated as an error by default
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
15 matches
Mail list logo
