From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id D99603840C39; Sat,  9 May 2020 20:27:26 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D99603840C39
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1589056046;
 bh=C7LcdzmbPJdqZ4+6BDnJX789C6ToNibiSUG05F1nZj0=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=RhJuRlZgsuVvKQKw70oVN1cEiy3tRLLcAsaa9HvzJwKyJOGT1Us/eT7CmUCYTyRKO
 jOb48f4pa+AJDoW/k3cDwH/GtY7i6AD/U27CKu00k4lYFFs7xccnddDrjRLnGuMXJ8
 q7xZCT+MGl5Vd2VCyKr/KhkZlhWFPYgdr92jgayo=
From: "dcb314 at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/80711] warn on non-const accessor member functions
Date: Sat, 09 May 2020 20:27:26 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 7.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-80711-4-KRaxkXYZyv@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-80711-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-80711-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 May 2020 20:27:27 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D80711

--- Comment #10 from David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> (In reply to David Binderman from comment #8)
> > My opinion is that a first approximation at implementation in gcc would
> > merely look for C++ member functions that are return statements only.
> > More fancy things could be done later in a second version.
>=20
> No, that won't work:

Of course. Some false positives are to be expected with a first
approximation.

Perhaps I've been slightly less than clear.=20

A first approximation isn't the final solution. It should
be a step towards a final solution.=