From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6706 invoked by alias); 17 Dec 2002 21:17:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 5983 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 21:15:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vortex.ticam.utexas.edu) (128.83.68.102) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 21:15:40 -0000 Received: from gandalf.ticam.utexas.edu (IDENT:0Z1HdqfaSdIWeaYb6gCdstqGsHTIuisv@gandalf.ticam.utexas.edu [128.83.68.35]) by vortex.ticam.utexas.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gBHLFbgh003674; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:15:37 -0600 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:42:00 -0000 From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, , Stefan Seefeld Subject: Re: wrong warning on private constructors Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01066.txt.bz2 > | Is there a way to disable this warning? Or better even, could this > | warning be dropped ? > > I think the logic used in the implementation is broken. Right. I find the warning equally unuseful, in particular since it warns about something that you will notice anyway. Warnings should warn about things that will go wrong when a variable/function/class is used and there is a risk that the user might not notice. But in this case the warning warns you when you don't even attempt to use the class, and when you use it you get the warning _plus_ the errors about private constructors etc. The only situation I can imagine where this is useful is that some library author writes a public class and never even tries to instantiate it in his own library, program, or testcases. This should be a case that is rare enough not to warrant this warning. Regards Wolfgang ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth