public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "eddy at opera dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/15269] __attribute__((deprecated)) broken with inline, ignored with pure virtual, misreported after definition Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 19:08:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20040503190813.14076.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20040503180849.15269.eddy@opera.com> ------- Additional Comments From eddy at opera dot com 2004-05-03 19:08 ------- Subject: Re: __attribute__((deprecated)) broken with inline, ignored with pure virtual, misreported after definition Nice to see the inline problem is fixed already :^) Unless it's also been fixed in the interval, problem number three is this: ----------- struct B { void foo() __attribute__((deprecated)); // declaration // documentation of why it's deprecated, how to dispense with it } void B::foo() { return; } // definition void demo(void) { ((B*)0)->foo(); } // gets warning ----------- the compiler's warning says foo was declared at line 5 when it was actually declared at line 2. If (as will be true in any real example) the declaration is in a header file and the definition is in a separate source file, whoever comes along to fix the warning is going to be directed to the definition, which doesn't have the documentation of why the method is decremented and how to do without it. This will be particularly monstrous if in fact the attribute is on a distant base class of B (I can't test this because of problem number one): the implementation of (some class in the same compilation unit as) B calls the foo of a B object after B has defined foo; the warning *really* needs to reference the far off header file which defines the base class ... being told about B's implementation of foo will be little use ! Eddy. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15269
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-03 19:08 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2004-05-03 18:08 [Bug c++/15269] New: " gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-05-03 18:39 ` [Bug c++/15269] " bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-05-03 19:08 ` eddy at opera dot com [this message] 2004-05-03 19:17 ` bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-05-03 19:20 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org [not found] <bug-15269-8457@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2007-09-23 4:33 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-23 4:37 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-23 4:40 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 15:54 ` eddy at opera dot com [not found] <bug-15269-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2021-08-11 20:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20040503190813.14076.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).