From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-335174-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 8908 invoked by alias); 30 Oct 2010 11:47:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 8899 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Oct 2010 11:47:10 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,MISSING_MID
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 11:47:07 +0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/32402] Error while allocating array of pointers to objects of a pure virtual class
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
In-Reply-To: <bug-32402-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-32402-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 11:47:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-10/txt/msg02563.txt.bz2
Message-ID: <20101030114700.hsuyIF-Lh9IzHtSpbx-Ym5k7ripcmNMTWr6lfUCAxeA@z>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32402

--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-10-30 11:46:47 UTC ---
As an extra data point, this compiles with -std=c++0x

struct pure;

void f()
{
    pure (*arr[3]);
    pure** p = new (decltype(arr));
    delete[] p;
}

This shows that allocating an array of pure* is semantically OK, it's just a
bug in parsing or checking the new-expression.