This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/13178] Bogus C++ error message referring to operator 1
- From: "bangerth at dealii dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 24 Nov 2003 18:27:51 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/13178] Bogus C++ error message referring to operator 1
- References: <20031124181040.13178.ian@airs.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-11-24 18:27 -------
Confirmed. The error message is not much worse than the one given previously
g/x> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.3.2/bin/c++ -c x.cc
x.cc: In function `int fn(C<float>)':
x.cc:7: error: no matching function for call to `C<float>::operator t(C<float>&)'
g/x> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-3.4-pre/bin/c++ -c x.cc
x.cc: In function `int fn(C<float>)':
x.cc:7: error: no matching function for call to `C<float>::operator 1(C<float>&)'
So this should maybe not count as a regression. It's a bad message
in any case, worth fixing.
W.
PS: How did you get to write such code? Martin van Loewis once posted
a PR in which he showed that such function signatures are sometimes
even accepted by gcc, erroneously of course (this is PR 8856)...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13178