From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32485 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2011 08:43:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 32475 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Feb 2011 08:43:40 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 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; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:43:35 +0000 From: "gcc at magfr dot user.lysator.liu.se" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/47695] New: [C++0X] Calling a deleted function fails twice X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: gcc at magfr dot user.lysator.liu.se X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:55:00 -0000 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: 2011-02/txt/msg01393.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47695 Summary: [C++0X] Calling a deleted function fails twice Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: c++ AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: gcc@magfr.user.lysator.liu.se Compiling the following: --- test.C --- void f() = delete; void g() { f(); } ---- --- triggers the errors: test.C: In function 'void g()': test.C:2:12: error: use of deleted function 'void f()' test.C:1:6: error: declared here test.C:2:14: error: use of deleted function 'void f()' test.C:1:6: error: declared here and I understand that the first set is due to me referring to the symbol and the second set is due to me calling it but I think one set of error messages would be enough here.