We're using a toolchain with a C++ <set> implementation that warns if the set uses a comparator without a const call operator:
In file included from ... /protobuf/src/google/protobuf/compiler/java/java_file.cc:41: In file included from ... /stl/gcc3/set:12: In file included from ... /include/c++/v1/set:389: ... include/c++/v1/__tree:1817:22: error: the specified comparator type does not provide a const call operator [-Werror,-Wuser-defined-warnings] ... include/c++/v1/set:400:28: note: in instantiation of member function 'std::__2::__tree<const google::protobuf::FieldDescriptor *, google::protobuf::compiler::java::(anonymous namespace)::FieldDescriptorCompare, std::__2::allocator<const google::protobuf::FieldDescriptor *> >::~__tree' requested here class _LIBCPP_TEMPLATE_VIS set Likely toolchain change: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL291969 This seems like a reasonable warning since a mutable comparator seems like the kind of thing that would defy expectations. Any objections to patching src/google/protobuf/compiler/java/java_file.cc with a const operator ()? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
