This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/13005] Pointer wrongly adjusted for derived class containing virtual function
- From: "stephenma at telus dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 10 Jan 2004 05:53:14 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/13005] Pointer wrongly adjusted for derived class containing virtual function
- References: <20031111075141.13005.stephenma@telus.net>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From stephenma at telus dot net 2004-01-10 05:53 -------
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | > As a matter of existing practrice, we don't say "see xxxx".
> |
> | Omitting the "see xxx" would do more harm than good. The g++
> | maintainers would be flooded with questions about the warning.
> |
> | If you intend to be rigid about this, please tell me now. I would
> | prefer to withdraw the patch rather than be blamed by people who do
> | not understand what the warning means.
>
> I don't mean to be ridig about it. I'm pointing out a fact and would
> like that to be taken into account, when you will be submitting a
> revised version.
OK, I will consider it, but I have good reasons to prefer leaving in
the cross reference.
As I said to Wolfgang a few messages back, if you or anyone else could
explain why there is such an objection to "see xxxx", I would
appreciate it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13005