This is the mail archive of the
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
c++/10473: conversion operator from private base used
- From: dv at vollmann dot ch
- To: gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: dv at vollmann dot ch
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 01:44:21 +0200
- Subject: c++/10473: conversion operator from private base used
>Number: 10473
>Category: c++
>Synopsis: g++ wrongly considers conversion operator from private base
>Confidential: no
>Severity: serious
>Priority: medium
>Responsible: unassigned
>State: open
>Class: rejects-legal
>Submitter-Id: net
>Arrival-Date: Wed Apr 23 23:56:00 UTC 2003
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator: Detlef Vollmann
>Release: 3.4 20030423 (experimental)
>Organization:
vollmann engineering gmbh
>Environment:
System: Linux dwarf 2.4.3-XFS #7 Mon Aug 6 18:43:20 CEST 2001 i686 unknown
Architecture: i686
host: i686-pc-linux-gnu
build: i686-pc-linux-gnu
target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
configured with: /pdsrc/gcc/cvs/gcc/configure --program-suffix=-test --prefix=/local/gcc-test --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --enable-languages=c,c++
>Description:
If a class defines an operator[] and a private base class defines
a conversion operator to a pointer, the use of the operator[]
can cause ambiguities. This would be correct if the derivation
would be public, but is wrong if the derivation is private.
>How-To-Repeat:
See attached file:
inherit-conv.cc:
typedef unsigned int size_t;
class Base
{
public:
typedef int *value_type;
Base() {}
operator value_type() const { return 0; }
void operator=(value_type val) {}
};
class Derived : private Base
{
public:
Derived() : p(0) {}
Base::value_type &operator[](size_t index) { return p; }
private:
Base::value_type p;
};
int main()
{
Derived ppBuf;
int *p = ppBuf[4];
ppBuf[0] = p;
return 0;
}
>Fix:
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: