From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-333748-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 25684 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2012 13:43:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 25672 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Dec 2012 13:43:12 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.7 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-ee0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-ee0-f47.google.com) (74.125.83.47)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:43:09 +0000
Received: by mail-ee0-f47.google.com with SMTP id e51so282673eek.20        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 05:43:07 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.14.225.194 with SMTP id z42mr17048285eep.22.1354887787878; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 05:43:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.14.141.134 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 05:43:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20121207133901.GW2315@tucnak.redhat.com>
References: <50C1790B.3040704@redhat.com>	<50C1B327.9060006@ubuntu.com>	<CAAiZkiBMo0iSnTS47GY_NCvGbif9DeAbPRrvxjZXt9Os=8SLAg@mail.gmail.com>	<20121207133901.GW2315@tucnak.redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:43:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAAiZkiAx+R1nhSYX4zhfQ_sGUT9C1bpHLEN-ireMvdPz-5RYuw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: C++ PATCH for c++/54325 (wrong error initializing abstract base class)
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com>, Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, 	gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-12/txt/msg00490.txt.bz2

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 07:34:30AM -0600, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> > Am 07.12.2012 06:05, schrieb Jason Merrill:
>> >> It's perfectly OK to initialize a base class of abstract type; it's only an
>> >> error to create a full object of such a type.  So this patch moves the check
>> >> from more generic initialization code out into a function that's definitely
>> >> creating a new object.
>> >>
>> >> Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk and 4.7.
>> >
>> > this doesn't build on the branch:
>> >
>> > ../gcc/cp/tree.c: In function 'build_aggr_init_expr':
>> > ../gcc/cp/tree.c:399:1: error: parameter name omitted
>> >
>> > this fixes the bootstrap, currently running the testsuite.
>> >
>> > --- cp/tree.c~  2012-12-07 10:01:16.665415647 +0100
>> > +++ cp/tree.c   2012-12-07 10:11:01.373410862 +0100
>> > @@ -396,7 +396,8 @@
>> >     callable.  */
>> >
>> >  tree
>> > -build_aggr_init_expr (tree type, tree init, tsubst_flags_t /*complain*/)
>> > +build_aggr_init_expr (tree type, tree init,
>> > +                     tsubst_flags_t complain ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>> >  {
>> >    tree fn;
>> >    tree slot;
>> >
>>
>> We should definitely teach the compiler to accept the former and not
>> be silly in requiring the latter when C++.
>
> Except that GCC 4.7 doesn't mandate building with C++, so the sources must
> be valid C.
>
>         Jakub

Right you are!

Thanks,

-- Gaby