This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/11856] unsigned warning in template
- From: "gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 17 Jan 2007 01:30:20 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/11856] unsigned warning in template
- References: <bug-11856-781@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #16 from gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2007-01-17 01:30 -------
Subject: Re: unsigned warning in template
"manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
| (In reply to comment #14)
| > | We don't emit a warning when instantiated as a signed char, so everything
| > boils
| > | down to having an option to disable the warning, doesn't it?
| >
| > the logical inference escapes me.
| >
|
| Is having an option to disable the warning the right fix for this PR or is it
| not?
You made an inference in an earlier message, and I would like to
understand it. Because, I do not believe a nobe in form
of "hey, you can silence it with with sledge-hammer" is the solution to this
particular type of constructs -- note that constants are involved.
Care to explain further your earlier message?
-- Gaby
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11856