On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Douglas Gregor <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 8, 2013, at 2:19 PM, John McCall <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 8, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Erik Verbruggen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Pardon my ignorance, but why a warning? Or to rephrase it: why could this be > problematic at all to fail with -Werror? > > > There's no good reason to use "auto" in a situation where it will always > infer as "id". People should either explicitly provide a more specific > type, in which case uses of the value will actually be meaningfully > type-checked, or they should type "id", which is shorter. > > > … and it's not an error because this could legitimately happen during > template instantiation, where we suppress the warning.
But if the warning is appropriately suppressed/doesn't fire in templates, why is that scenario a reason not to have it be an error? _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
