From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-428041-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 19051 invoked by alias); 19 Aug 2013 18:30:04 -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
Received: (qmail 19014 invoked by uid 48); 19 Aug 2013 18:30:02 -0000
From: "dushistov at mail dot ru" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/58194] New: default argument for constructor outside of class DR 1344
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 18:30:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dushistov at mail dot ru
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
Message-ID: <bug-58194-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg00965.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58194

            Bug ID: 58194
           Summary: default argument for constructor outside of class DR
                    1344
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.8.1
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: dushistov at mail dot ru

Such simple code accepted by gcc 4.8.1:

struct Foo {
    Foo(const char *);
};

Foo::Foo(const char *str = 0)
{
}

There is DR 1344 about it:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1344

and according to disscussion in clang mailing list:

http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Reason-for-Diagnostic-on-default-ctors-redeclaration-td4032117.html

Quote:

This was last discussed by WG21 at the Bloomington meeting. Notes from there:

  "Consensus: Make this ill-formed as suggested in the write-up. Core issue
1344. Priority 0, Doug drafting."

So it would be nice, if gcc emit error on such bad code.