This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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] |
On 06/04/2012 06:55 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:Ok, I'll see what happens in the various specific circumstances. Indeed, earlier today I wondered myself if in principle not setting LOOKUP_COMPLAIN was just tf_none, but looking at the code things seemed more complex, when eg we are currently warning without checking LOOKUP_COMPLAIN and with complain available normally we would protect the warning with complain & tf_warning. But I don't want to speak too early ;) Let me see.If, more generally, you mean we should remove it completely, I'm afraid some cases are rather nasty. For example, I think that whenever we go through implicit_conversion, thus its flags &=, the following function calls can easily have at the same time complain & tf_error true and flags & LOOKUP_COMPLAIN false.
In cases where we currently don't set LOOKUP_COMPLAIN in flags, we can instead set complain to tf_none.
Thanks! Paolo.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |