public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/55924] New: [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected
@ 2013-01-09 18:28 daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 18:33 ` [Bug c++/55924] " daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com @ 2013-01-09 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55924
Bug #: 55924
Summary: [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are
correctly detected
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: daniel.kruegler@googlemail.com
The following code, compiled with
-Wall -std=c++11 -pedantic
is rejected by gcc 4.7.2 and gcc 4.8.0 20130106 (experimental):
//----------------
struct mine
{
mine& operator=(mine rhs) { return *this; }
mine& operator=(mine&& rhs) noexcept { return *this; }
};
int main()
{
mine a;
mine b;
a = b;
}
//----------------
"In function 'int main()':|
12|error: use of deleted function 'constexpr mine::mine(const mine&)'|
1|note: 'constexpr mine::mine(const mine&)' is implicitly declared as deleted
because 'mine' declares a move constructor or move assignment operator|
3|error: initializing argument 1 of 'mine& mine::operator=(mine)'|
"
According to 12.8 p17:
"A user-declared copy assignment operator X::operator= is a non-static
non-template member function of class X with exactly one parameter of type X,
X&, const X&, volatile X& or const volatile X&."
and p18:
"If the class definition does not explicitly declare a copy assignment
operator, one is declared implicitly. If the class definition declares a move
constructor or move assignment operator, the implicitly declared copy
assignment operator is defined as deleted;"
Therefore class mine provides a user-declared copy-assignment operator, but gcc
doesn't recognize that.
This code should be accepted.
I reduced the severity, because this kind of code is expected to be a rather
unusual edge-case. Every other form of the copy-assignment operator using
references is correctly detected.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/55924] [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected
2013-01-09 18:28 [Bug c++/55924] New: [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
@ 2013-01-09 18:33 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 18:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com @ 2013-01-09 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55924
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> 2013-01-09 18:32:26 UTC ---
Remark: The noexcept specifier was added unintentionally and is not relevant to
reproduce the described problem.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/55924] [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected
2013-01-09 18:28 [Bug c++/55924] New: [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 18:33 ` [Bug c++/55924] " daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
@ 2013-01-09 18:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-01-09 18:43 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-01-09 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55924
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2013-01-09
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-01-09 18:39:46 UTC ---
Clang thinks you need to add
mine() = default;
mine(const mine&) = default;
for the code to be accepted and I agree, otherwise the operator=(mine)
assignment operator calls the copy constructor which is deleted because of a
user-declared move assignment operator.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/55924] [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected
2013-01-09 18:28 [Bug c++/55924] New: [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 18:33 ` [Bug c++/55924] " daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 18:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-01-09 18:43 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-01-09 18:44 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 19:04 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-01-09 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55924
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED
Ever Confirmed|1 |0
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-01-09 18:42:30 UTC ---
Oops, I didn't meant to change this to NEW, sorry
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/55924] [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected
2013-01-09 18:28 [Bug c++/55924] New: [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-01-09 18:43 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-01-09 18:44 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 19:04 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com @ 2013-01-09 18:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55924
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> 2013-01-09 18:43:52 UTC ---
Oops I failed to read the error description correctly. The compiler is correct,
so please declare this as INVALID. Sorry for the noise.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/55924] [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected
2013-01-09 18:28 [Bug c++/55924] New: [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2013-01-09 18:44 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
@ 2013-01-09 19:04 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-01-09 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55924
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-01-09 19:04:13 UTC ---
.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-01-09 19:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-01-09 18:28 [Bug c++/55924] New: [C++11] Not all copy-assignment operator forms are correctly detected daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 18:33 ` [Bug c++/55924] " daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 18:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-01-09 18:43 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-01-09 18:44 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-09 19:04 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
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).