Re: c++/9750: Strange code in handling of COND? expressions in cp/call.c

[bangerth@dealii.org]

Synopsis: Strange code in handling of COND? expressions in cp/call.c

Responsible-Changed-From-To: unassigned->mmitchel
Responsible-Changed-By: bangerth
Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Feb 19 02:50:19 2003
Responsible-Changed-Why:
    Inserted the comment before the dubious part of the code as
    well as most of the other stuff around.
State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: bangerth
State-Changed-When: Wed Feb 19 02:50:19 2003
State-Changed-Why:
    True -- good spot! The code is still in present CVS.
    
    CVS annotate shows for this part:
    1.1          (law      11-Aug-97): 	return candidates;
    1.152        (mmitchel 26-Jul-99):       
    1.152        (mmitchel 26-Jul-99):       /* We don't check that the two types are the same; the logic
    1.152        (mmitchel 26-Jul-99): 	 below will actually create two candidates; one in which both
    1.152        (mmitchel 26-Jul-99): 	 parameter types are TYPE1, and one in which both parameter
    1.152        (mmitchel 26-Jul-99): 	 types are TYPE2.  */
    1.1          (law      11-Aug-97): 	break;
    1.152        (mmitchel 26-Jul-99): 
    1.329        (mrs      09-Aug-02):       /* These arguments do not make for a valid overloaded operator.  */
    1.1          (law      11-Aug-97):       return candidates;
    
    So I guess Mark might know best what should come after the
    comment he inserted. Probably something easy enough to
    check.
    
    If you have more of this dubious stuff, let us know!
    
    Thanks
      Wolfgang

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=9750