wrong warning on private constructors

[Stefan Seefeld]

Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:

> I think the logic used in the implementation is broken.  I'm not
> sanguine about dropping the warning (although I suspect that people
> would suddendly fill reports).  Maybe a workable way would be to find
> an exhaustive criterioon (no friends, no public memeber function) that
> would make that warning unbroken. 

oh, sure. It's certainly possible from within gcc to test whether
the class is usable, and to emit that warning in case it *really* is
not. I just thought that not emitting that warning is better than
emitting it always, which is wrong.

Thanks,
		Stefa