[Bug c++/63179] Virtuality is not working
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63179 --- Comment #2 from Pavel isak50 at mail dot ru --- Sorry.
[Bug c++/63179] New: Does not work virtuality
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63179
Bug ID: 63179
Summary: Does not work virtuality
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: isak50 at mail dot ru
// g++ 1.cpp -O2 -Wall -std=c++11 -Wall
#include stdio.h
struct Base{
virtual void f() {printf(base\n);}
};
struct Child : Base{
void f()override {printf(child\n);}
};
alignas(Child)
char buf[sizeof(Child)];
union Ptr{
decltype(::buf) buf;
Base base;
};
int main(){
new(buf) Child;
Ptr *ptr = reinterpret_castPtr*(buf);
//---printf: base---//
ptr-base.f(); //
Base b = ptr-base;//
b.f(); // clang print child.
//--//
//---printf: child--//
Base *b2 = ptr-base; //
b2-f();//
//--//
}
[Bug other/61549] New: Error when linking with shared libraries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61549
Bug ID: 61549
Summary: Error when linking with shared libraries
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: isak50 at mail dot ru
// os - linux debian
//-- /usr/local/lib/1.cpp
#include iostream
struct S
{
int val;
S() {val=1; std::cout 1::constr\n;}
~S() {std::cout 1::destr\n;}
}s;
extern int f1() {return s.val;}
//-- /usr/local/lib/2.cpp
#include iostream
struct S
{
int val;
S() {val=2; std::cout 2::constr\n;}
~S() {std::cout 2::destr\n;}
}s;
extern int f2() {return s.val;}
//-- /usr/local/lib/ex.cpp
#include iostream
extern int f1();
extern int f2();
int main()
{
std::cout ex::main\n;
std::cout f1 = f1() \n;
std::cout f2 = f2() \n;
return 0;
}
//-- buid
/usr/local/lib $ g++ 1.cpp -fPIC -shared -o lib1.so
/usr/local/lib $ g++ 2.cpp -fPIC -shared -o lib2.so
/usr/local/lib $ g++ ex.cpp lib1.so lib2.so -o ex
/usr/local/lib $ ldconfig
//-- run
./ex
//-- output
1::constr
1::constr // Why 1::constr? should be 2::constr
ex::main
f1 = 1
f2 = 1
1::destr// Why 1::destr? should be 2::destr
1::destr
[Bug c++/61327] Problem with friend template object
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61327
--- Comment #2 from Pavel isak50 at mail dot ru ---
// Clang compiles without errors.
class B {
protected:
void f() {}
};
template typename...
struct S;
template typename R
struct SR{
template typename T
static void caller(T *p) {p-B::f();} // error: 'void B::f()' is
protected
//static void caller(T *p) {p-f();}// Ok
};
class Q : B{
template typename... friend struct S;
};
int main(){
Q q;
Sint::caller(q);
return 0;
}
[Bug c++/61327] New: Problem with friend template object
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61327
Bug ID: 61327
Summary: Problem with friend template object
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: isak50 at mail dot ru
// Although struct Call_check is a friend for the Comp, the compiler reports
// that Cnd1::ch() is protected.
#include iostream
#include type_traits
template typename... _Break_expression
struct Call_check;
template typename _Type
struct Call_check_Type
{
template typename _T
static void call(_T *trend)
{
trend-_Type::ch();
}
};
class Cnd1
{
protected:
void ch(void) {std::cout hello from Cnd1\n;}
};
class Comp : Cnd1
{
template typename...
friend struct Call_check;
public:
void check() {Call_checkCnd1::call(this);}
};
int main()
{
Comp cm;
cm.check();
return 0;
}
[Bug c++/59554] New: Errors with const and volatile in templates.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59554
Bug ID: 59554
Summary: Errors with const and volatile in templates.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: isak50 at mail dot ru
Created attachment 31477
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31477action=edit
source.ii
// templates mis_... don't find out a const and a volatile. Also std tools of
// type_traits fail.
// Windows, TDM GCC
#include stdio.h
template typename _Ty
struct mis_const{ static void ch() { printf(is const:
false\n); } };
template typename _Ty
struct mis_constconst _Ty { static void ch() { printf(is const:
true\n); } };
template typename _Ty
struct mis_volatile { static void ch() { printf(is
volatile: false\n); } };
template typename _Ty
struct mis_volatilevolatile _Ty { static void ch() { printf(is
volatile: true\n); } };
template typename _Ty
struct mis_pointer { static void ch() { printf(is
pointer: false\n); } };
template typename _Ty
struct mis_pointer_Ty * { static void ch() { printf(is
pointer: true\n); } };
template typename _T
void show(_T t)
{
printf(--_T\n);
mis_const_T::ch();
mis_volatile_T::ch();
mis_pointer_T::ch();
printf(--decltype(t)---\n);
mis_constdecltype(t)::ch();
mis_volatiledecltype(t)::ch();
mis_pointerdecltype(t)::ch();
}
int main()
{
const volatile int *g {nullptr};
show(g);
return 0;
}
// Console output:
// --_T
// is const:false error: not const.
// is volatile: false error: not volatile.
// is pointer: true It's ok?
// --decltype(t)---
// is const:false
// is volatile: false
// is pointer: true
[Bug c++/59554] Errors with const and volatile in templates.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59554
--- Comment #2 from Pavel isak50 at mail dot ru ---
if i edit code so:
template typename _T
void show(_T t)
{
*t = nullptr;// added
printf(--_T\n);
mis_const_T::ch();
mis_volatile_T::ch();
mis_pointer_T::ch();
printf(--decltype(t)---\n);
mis_constdecltype(t)::ch();
mis_volatiledecltype(t)::ch();
mis_pointerdecltype(t)::ch();
}
i receive error:
C:\TDM\msys\1.0\prg\tmake -s
../source.cpp: In instantiation of 'void show(_T) [with _T = const volatile
int*
]':
../source.cpp:43:11: required from here
../source.cpp:26:12: error: assignment of read-only location '* t'
*t = nullptr;
Pay attention: [with _T = const volatile int*]
[Bug c++/59554] Errors with const and volatile in templates.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59554 --- Comment #3 from Pavel isak50 at mail dot ru --- Sorry, I am wrong. Gcc work right.
