This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/6811
- From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>
- To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 26 May 2002 17:13:44 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix libstdc++/6811
- References: <3CF0EDA5.3060804@unitus.it> <m3hekv0yrt.fsf@merlin.nerim.net>
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>I gave it more thought: maybe one could try instantiating it and
>pass a flag to GCC to warn about missing return statement. I don't
>know how far we can get with that.
>
Anyway, I find this very interesting! It seems that many stupid but
*very* serious bugs don't get caught 'til you have a testing framework
which thorughly instantiates the various classes...
>|
>| Ok for both? (tested x86-linux, as usual)
>
>Yes.
>
Thanks. Done.
Could you possibly help a bit with libstdc++/6642?
Currently we cannot compile the trivial:
#include <string>
class MyClass {
private:
std::string s;
std::string::iterator it;
public:
unsigned pos() const {
return it - s.begin();
}
};
which mixes a const_iterator and an iterator. The issue is becoming
clearer to me (read DR179 and DR280) but I'm not sure which is the best fix.
Ciao, Paolo.