From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3758 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2002 20:46:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3743 invoked by uid 71); 16 Aug 2002 20:46:02 -0000 Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020816204602.3742.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Andrew Pinski Subject: Re: c++/7616: New warning request Reply-To: Andrew Pinski X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00337.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/7616; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andrew Pinski To: Sylvain.Pion@sophia.inria.fr Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/7616: New warning request Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 16:41:54 -0400 gcc does warn in a slightly different case with `-W -Wall': struct A { int i; void f(int i) const; }; void A::f(int i) const { } It is a know problem with gcc and inlined functions. Thanks, Andrew Pinski On Friday, August 16, 2002, at 04:27 , Sylvain.Pion@sophia.inria.fr wrote: > struct A > { > int i; > void f(int i) const {} > };