This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Does GCC 3.4 fix this bug?

From: Eljay Love-Jensen <eljay at adobe dot com>
To: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: "gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 11:42:36 -0500
Subject: Re: Does GCC 3.4 fix this bug?
References: <5.2.1.1.0.20030911110503.00bb5d20@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com><5.2.1.1.0.20030911110503.00bb5d20@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com>

Hi Nathan,

>quux is a function taking a (pointer to function taking no args, returning a Foo) argument and returning a Bar

I realize that's what the compiler is interpreting it as.  But I believe that the compiler's interpretation of the code is incorrect.

MSVC (that bastion of standards compliance -- NOT!), and CodeWarrior interpret the code as the variable quux using the const Foo& constructor of Bar.

I don't have the EDG compiler at my disposal, and my Comeau C++ compiler is from 1990 (*grin*).

--Eljay

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Does GCC 3.4 fix this bug?
  - From: Nathan Sidwell

References:
- Does GCC 3.4 fix this bug?
  - From: Eljay Love-Jensen
- Re: Does GCC 3.4 fix this bug?
  - From: Nathan Sidwell

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]