From: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
To: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: C++ PATCH for c++/88136, -Wdeprecated-copy too noisy
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 14:52:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADzB+2nDxLdvG_Ybug33nZNiJu2i9cLLaD5Eh0nhZJMBJhJQDA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFk2RUY2QCETnjnCpoE8es0abY0ADVBQfdqj+a2gvGhdZoR+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 1:33 PM Ville Voutilainen
<ville.voutilainen@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 at 20:05, Ville Voutilainen
> <ville.voutilainen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > New compiler releases will usually include new warnings that require
> > > some code modification to accommodate. Why is this one particularly
> > > problematic?
> >
> > I don't think it's any more problematic than any other warning that
> > introduces new errors for fools that build with -Wall and -Werror.
> > But considering that those errors are false positives, and that
> > turning them off will in some cases require writing boiler-plate
> > (defaulted assignments), I would merely prefer having another release
> > round to get fixes for my codebase out in the wild.
>
> For what it's worth, I find it unfortunate that this deprecation and its resulting warnings end up
> making the decision on whether a "rule of 5" must be followed; correct code needs to be adjusted
> to cope with a fairly stylistic matter, with false positives and all.
I don't see it as a stylistic matter. If you need a user-provided
copy constructor to get proper copy semantics for a class, you almost
certainly need the same thing for copy assignment. This was too noisy
for destructors, for which it's fairly common to define a virtual
destructor just to make a class polymorphic, not because there are
significant destruction semantics. But I don't see a similar argument
for copy constructors: in your example, there was no need for
QVariant::Private to define a copy constructor, and that seems like a
situation where a warning is reasonable, even if the code is in fact
correct.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-12 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-06 21:12 Jason Merrill
2018-12-08 16:46 ` Ville Voutilainen
2018-12-08 16:58 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-08 17:17 ` Ville Voutilainen
2018-12-08 17:53 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-08 18:05 ` Ville Voutilainen
2018-12-08 18:33 ` Ville Voutilainen
2018-12-12 14:52 ` Jason Merrill [this message]
2018-12-12 15:30 ` Ville Voutilainen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CADzB+2nDxLdvG_Ybug33nZNiJu2i9cLLaD5Eh0nhZJMBJhJQDA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=ville.voutilainen@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).