[Bug c++/28774] Request for warning where const/volatile is ignored in a cast

2007-03-12 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-12 12:10 --- This seems a duplicate of PR 14710. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28774

[Bug c++/28774] Request for warning where const/volatile is ignored in a cast

2007-03-12 Thread simon_baldwin at yahoo dot com
--- Comment #7 from simon_baldwin at yahoo dot com 2007-03-12 21:48 --- PR 14710 isn't really quite the same thing as PR 28774. PR 14170 is concerned with unnecessary casts; PR 28774 is concerned with unnecessary const or volatile qualifiers within otherwise valid and perhaps necessary

[Bug c++/28774] Request for warning where const/volatile is ignored in a cast

2007-01-23 Thread manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-23 14:35 --- We already have a warning about discarding qualifiers somewhere. Perhaps we could just add this to that one (saving us from yet another warning option). -- manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What

[Bug c++/28774] Request for warning where const/volatile is ignored in a cast

2006-08-27 Thread ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #4 from ian at airs dot com 2006-08-27 06:44 --- I disagree. It is always useful to optionally warn about meaningless code. It can be a way to find a real bug in the program. It is not conceptually different from existing warnings like -Wredundant-decls. The code works

[Bug c++/28774] Request for warning where const/volatile is ignored in a cast

2006-08-26 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-27 05:03 --- (In reply to comment #2) icc warns here; this PR aims to improve agreement in warnings between g++ and icc. HUH? Why do you want that? GCC warns in more places than ICC will ever warn. To me this is an

[Bug c++/28774] Request for warning where const/volatile is ignored in a cast

2006-08-24 Thread simon_baldwin at yahoo dot com
--- Comment #2 from simon_baldwin at yahoo dot com 2006-08-24 16:53 --- You didn't miss anything. There's no bug here, just a request for a new warning message. As you note, the const-volatile qualifications in the cast have no meaning, and are completely ignored by the compiler.

[Bug c++/28774] Request for warning where const/volatile is ignored in a cast

2006-08-23 Thread bangerth at dealii dot org
--- Comment #1 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-08-24 01:59 --- Um, why? The value 1.234 is an rvalue of type double. You cast it to an rvalue of type const int, which can clearly be assigned to an int right away without another cast. In fact, const-volatile qualifications do not