From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22102 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2015 15:34:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 22092 invoked by uid 89); 1 Jun 2015 15:34:44 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Received: from snape.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (HELO smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE) (129.70.160.84) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:34:43 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F3F7A5; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 17:34:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (malfoy.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id lVLbPqxQVS9c; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 17:34:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fuego.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (p54878C0A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.135.140.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 67FB57A4; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 17:34:39 +0200 (CEST) From: Rainer Orth To: Jason Merrill Cc: gcc-patches List Subject: Re: C++ PATCH to handling of exception specs in system headers References: <55662E61.4020707@redhat.com> <556C7321.2040008@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:34:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <556C7321.2040008@redhat.com> (Jason Merrill's message of "Mon, 01 Jun 2015 10:58:41 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00090.txt.bz2 Jason Merrill writes: > On 06/01/2015 08:13 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> Jason Merrill writes: >> >>> -pedantic shouldn't change something from OK into an error, but it was >>> doing so for redeclaration of a declaration from a system header with a >>> mismatched exception specification. And whether we are strict about things >>> in system headers should be controlled by -Wsystem-headers. >>> >>> Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. >> >> The new g++.dg/warn/Wsystem-headers1.C test FAILs on Solaris 10 and 11: >> >> FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wsystem-headers1.C -std=c++98 (test for excess errors) >> >> /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wsystem-headers1.C:3:33: >> error: 'double atof(const char*)' conflicts with a previous declaration >> In file included from /usr/include/stdlib.h:17:0, >> from >> /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wsystem-headers1.C:1: >> /var/gcc/regression/trunk/10-gcc/build/gcc/include-fixed/iso/stdlib_iso.h:119:15: >> note: previous declaration 'double std::atof(const char*)' > > It's not clear what the conflict is. Can you quote the declaration from > stdlib_iso.h? sure: it's extern double atof(const char *); which is inside #if __cplusplus >= 199711L namespace std { #endif #ifdef __cplusplus extern "C" { #endif Isn't this about global vs. std namespace? Rainer -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University