This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C++ Patch] PR 14263
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at axiomatics dot org>
- To: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches\ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 10:36:40 -0500
- Subject: Re: [C++ Patch] PR 14263
- References: <51D6DB8A dot 7030507 at oracle dot com>
Paolo Carlini <email@example.com> writes:
| this issue dates back to 2004 and got stalled pretty soon. Essentially
| Gaby wanted to see *dynamic_cast* explicitly mentioned in this kind of
| diagnostic (we used to explicitly talk about static_cast), whereas
| Mark found the current status an improvement over the past, proposed
| some further, minor, improvements (which I tried to implement in the
| Today I noticed that current ICC, clang, OracleStudio, all produce
| diagnostic quite similar, modulo the latter improvements, to GCC and
| decided to explore whether Gaby (and Jason) would like to reassess the
| bug, whether today we want to talk about dynamic_cast.
| Tested x86_64-linux.
I still consider talk of 'static_cast' in this context a non-starter.
However, maybe just saying "convert" would be OK -- though clearly
giving hints of dynamic_cast is much better.
Minor nits: say "base class" instead of "base", and "derived class"
instead of "derived type".
Otherwise, patch OK with these suggestions.