a warning to implement

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:

| >>| I think here we should REALLY had a warning;
| 
| Yes, good point from Bernard, I agree this is a case that really needs
| a warning.

There was no good point.  The class I showed wasn't designed to have a
default constructor -- that is part of its specification.  The
compiler (or Bernard) shouldn't insist on knowing more than the
class-defisgner. 

There are already plenty of warnings there saying they know more than
thge programmer -- and in effect thery don't -- ending with being
completely unusable in modern C++; an example is -Weffc++ (or whatever
it is called). 

-- Gaby