Re: Purpose of -Wno-pmf-conversions Class Has No Vtable)

[Mike Stump <mrs at wrs dot com>]

> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 15:47:10 +0200
> From: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de>

> Installed. Unfortunately, I found that g++.mike/p10769a.C and
> g++.mike/p11012.C break with the patch

> To me, there is a genuine error in the test cases. The code is
> ill-formed; you cannot convert a pointer-to-member-function to
> pointer-to-function.

Extension.

> Before restoring the old behaviour (i.e. fixing it to pass these tests
> again), I'd like to know whether this is an official extension of g++:

Define official?  :-)  I made it, I intended to.

> I'm willing to correct this in a number of different ways: Either
> complete the extension to a meaningful semantics (perhaps with
> well-known restrictions), or to drop the extension entirely.

> From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:39:34 -0700

> You know how I feel about extensions. :-) This one is certainly not
> documented in the manual.  I see no reason to retain it, but Jason
> has more knowledge of the odd things people are doing with g++, so I
> will defer to his judgement.

I am not wedded to the extension.  It can be dumped.  I tend to the
conservative in breaking code, so if I were editing it, I'd probably
leave it, but breaking this type of code I don't think hurts too many
people (and they can unhurt themselves with the other ways of doing
this type of thing).

I guess that amounts to a go ahead and remove it.