[Bug c++/21908] New: Even poorer diagnostic

[Bug c++/21908] New: Even poorer diagnostic

[igodard at pacbell dot net]

struct  virt { virt() : i(2) {} virt(int i) : i(i){} int i;  };
struct der1 : public virtual virt { der1(int i) : virt(i) {} }
struct der2 : public virtual virt { der2(int i) : virt(i) {} }
struct top : public der1, public der2 {
    top () : der1(0) {} };


gets you:

~/ootbc/members/src$ g++ foo.cc
foo.cc: In constructor `top::top()':
foo.cc:5: error: no matching function for call to `der2::der2(const void**)'
foo.cc:3: note: candidates are: der2::der2(const der2&)
foo.cc:3: note:                 der2::der2(int)
foo.cc: At global scope:
foo.cc:5: error: multiple types in one declaration

-- 
           Summary: Even poorer diagnostic
           Product: gcc
           Version: 3.4.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: igodard at pacbell dot net
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908

[Bug c++/21908] Even poorer diagnostic

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-06-04 14:59 -------
Again you missed the semi-colon.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908

[Bug c++/21908] Even poorer diagnostic

[igodard at pacbell dot net]

------- Additional Comments From igodard at pacbell dot net  2005-06-04 18:55 -------
So I did :-)  So where does the `der2::der2(const void**)' come from?

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908

[Bug c++/21908] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] poor diagnostic with vitrual base classes

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-06-04 19:30 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> So I did :-)  So where does the `der2::der2(const void**)' come from?

It is a bug and a regression.
Reduced testcase for that bug:
struct  virt { virt(){} virt(int i){}  };
struct der: public virtual virt { der(int i):virt(i) {} };
struct top : public der {
    top () {} };

3.2.3 gave:
t.cc: In constructor `top::top()':
t.cc:4: no matching function for call to `der::der()'
t.cc:2: candidates are: der::der(const der&)
t.cc:2:                 der::der(int)

which is the correct diagnostic.

3.3.3 gave something just as weird as 3.4.0 (and above):
t.cc: In constructor `top::top()':
t.cc:4: error: no matching function for call to `der::der(const <anonymous>**)'
t.cc:2: error: candidates are: der::der(const der&)
t.cc:2: error:                 der::der(int)

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
           Keywords|                            |diagnostic
      Known to fail|                            |3.3.3 3.4.0 4.0.0 4.1.0
      Known to work|                            |3.2.3
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2005-06-04 19:30:11
               date|                            |
            Summary|Even poorer diagnostic      |[3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression]
                   |                            |poor diagnostic with vitrual
                   |                            |base classes
   Target Milestone|---                         |3.4.5


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908

[Bug c++/21908] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] poor diagnostic with vitrual base classes

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-22 21:13 -------
Moving to 4.0.2 pre Mark.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|3.4.5                       |4.0.2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908

[Bug c++/21908] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] poor diagnostic with vitrual base classes

[mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.0.2                       |4.0.3


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908

[Bug c++/21908] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] poor diagnostic with vitrual base classes

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-18 05:55 -------
Subject: Bug 21908

CVSROOT:        /cvs/gcc
Module name:    gcc
Branch:         gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by:     mmitchel@gcc.gnu.org    2005-10-18 05:55:43

Modified files:
        gcc/cp         : call.c ChangeLog 

Log message:
        PR c++/21908
        * call.c (build_new_method_call): Do not show VTT parameters to
        the user.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/call.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.531.2.12&r2=1.531.2.13
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branch&r1=1.4648.2.141&r2=1.4648.2.142


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908

[Bug c++/21908] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] poor diagnostic with vitrual base classes

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-18 05:56 -------
Subject: Bug 21908

CVSROOT:        /cvs/gcc
Module name:    gcc
Changes by:     mmitchel@gcc.gnu.org    2005-10-18 05:56:04

Modified files:
        gcc/cp         : call.c ChangeLog 

Log message:
        PR c++/21908
        * call.c (build_new_method_call): Do not show VTT parameters to
        the user.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/call.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.559&r2=1.560
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4943&r2=1.4944


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908

[Bug c++/21908] [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] poor diagnostic with vitrual base classes

[mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |mark at codesourcery dot com
                   |dot org                     |
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21908