On Nov 27, 2012, at 7:45 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Author: rsmith
> Date: Tue Nov 27 21:45:24 2012
> New Revision: 168769
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=168769&view=rev
> Log:
> C++ core issue 1344, PR10618: promote "addition of default argument makes this
> a special member" diagnostic from warning to error, and fix the cases where it
> produced diagnostics with incorrect wording.
>
> We don't support this as an extension, and we ban it even in C++98 mode. This
> breaks too much (for instance, the ABI-specified calling convention for a type
> can change if it acquires a copy constructor through the addition of a default
> argument).
Is it an error to add a default argument when there's already a special member
of that exact type (ignoring the now-defaulted parameters)? e.g.
struct A {
int x;
A() = default;
A(int x);
};
A::A(int x = 7) : x(x) {} // error?
John.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
