a warning to implement

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:

| <Well, that construct have been debated to death in the C++ committee.
| And given the length of the debate and the opinions expressed there I
| would certainly *not* characterize it as obviously dubious.  I would
| object to have it enabled by -Wall.
| >
| What possible useful semantic meaning can this statement have? I can see
| a debate in the C++ committee as to whether it should be legal or not (that's
| quite a subtle issue, and indeed could be expected to generate debate), but
| I can't imagine a debate over whether it is useful or not. So I see no basis
| for your objection.

Then you're wrong because the issue of the debate wasn't whether it
should be valid statement; the issue was whether it could be a useful
construct -- incidentally some wanted to make it ill-formed.  

Can you imagine use of signaling NaNs?

-- Gaby