--- Comment #9 from deba at inf dot elte dot hu 2008-12-03 19:26 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
I'm not convinced that we shouldn't warn in these cases. Yes, there are cases
where people overload the operators in ways that make normal precedence
irrelevant. But, there are also cases
--- Comment #2 from deba at inf dot elte dot hu 2008-07-25 10:24 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Example?
In the LEMON graph library (http://lemon.cs.elte.hu/) there is an LP solver
interface. The LP constraints could be added like the next formulation:
lp.addRow((double) = (Lp::Expr
--- Comment #4 from deba at inf dot elte dot hu 2008-07-25 14:43 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
What Andrew means by example is a short, self-contained, compilable testcase
that shows the undesired behaviour.
struct A {};
A operator(A, A) { return A(); }
int main
is not
correct
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: deba at inf dot elte dot hu
GCC build triplet
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: deba at inf dot elte dot hu
GCC build triplet: i486-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet
