From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12233 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2010 09:15:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 12175 invoked by uid 48); 2 Jul 2010 09:15:23 -0000 Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 09:15:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100702091523.12174.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c++/44499] No default constructor available In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-07/txt/msg00173.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-02 09:15 ------- Thanks Pawel, which diagnostic do you prefer? I would favor clang's but I would still keep the note that points to the class definition. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44499