From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15811 invoked by alias); 11 Apr 2003 01:16:40 -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 15789 invoked by uid 48); 11 Apr 2003 01:16:40 -0000 Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 01:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030411011640.15788.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, igusarov@mail.ru, nobody@gcc.gnu.org From: ljrittle@gcc.gnu.org Reply-To: ljrittle@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, igusarov@mail.ru, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/10332: Template classes are not instantiated correctly in presense of #pragma pack() X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00481.txt.bz2 List-Id: Synopsis: Template classes are not instantiated correctly in presense of #pragma pack() State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: ljrittle State-Changed-When: Fri Apr 11 01:16:40 2003 State-Changed-Why: Igor created a small test case which displays the behavior he considers a bug and included an analysis of the failure. I will add only one comment: because a feature is hard to use in a complex program does not imply that the feature has incorrect behaviour. In this case, #pragma pack came from a C ABI. It is doubtful anyone ever looked at the rules as applied to C ++. E.g. no documentation on such interactions is found in tm.texi. One correct resolution to this PR is to update our documentation. (I will also add another user-level fix.) http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10332