------- Comment #3 from pgrealis at yahoo-inc dot com 2009-02-17 11:20 ------- (In reply to comment #1) > This is perfectly valid C++.
I never claimed anything different. Is your argument that no warning should be issued for "perfectly valid C++"? "(int)1.5" is perfectly valid C++, yet -Wold-style-cast will emit a warning for its use. To close as INVALID, please refute the following: > I can't think of a scenario where one would want to write x.f() over X::f() > when f() is static. -- pgrealis at yahoo-inc dot com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pgrealis at yahoo-inc dot | |com Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39205