This is the mail archive of the
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: c++/8931: g++ 3.2 fails to enforce access rules
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org,
- Date: 13 Dec 2002 21:16:04 -0000
- Subject: Re: c++/8931: g++ 3.2 fails to enforce access rules
- Reply-to: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
The following reply was made to PR c++/8931; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
To: bangerth@dealii.org
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, sebor@roguewave.com,
gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: c++/8931: g++ 3.2 fails to enforce access rules
Date: 13 Dec 2002 22:01:37 +0100
bangerth@dealii.org writes:
| Synopsis: g++ 3.2 fails to enforce access rules
|
| State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
| State-Changed-By: bangerth
| State-Changed-When: Fri Dec 13 12:49:13 2002
| State-Changed-Why:
| Present mainline gives
| tmp/g> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.3-pre/bin/c++ -c x.cc
| x.cc: In instantiation of `S<C<int> >':
| x.cc:14: instantiated from here
| x.cc:10: error: `typedef int C<int>::Private' is private
| x.cc:4: error: within this context
|
| Since it is not a regression, it is not going to be fixed
| in any 3.2.* and there is no value in keeping this report
| open.
It would be really helpful if non-invasive bug fixes could make it to
branch when it is not frozen.
Setting the bar to only regression fixes is, IMHO, too high and
renders the dot releases less useful and less attractive. Indeed,
I've seen lot of PRs being closed on the basis that they are fixed on
mainline and since they are not regressions they won't be fixed in
3.2.x. The net effect is that people would have to wait for some (long)
undeterminated time before they had a compiler that fixes the bugs,
and meanwhile we will be releasing compilers that could include
those patches.
My two cents.
-- Gaby