From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 55119 invoked by alias); 2 Dec 2016 18:11:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 55068 invoked by uid 89); 2 Dec 2016 18:11:03 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1583, policy X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Dec 2016 18:11:02 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0C58624CC; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 18:11:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn03.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.3]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uB2IAx79031285; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:11:00 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFA 1/8] Add gdb_ref_ptr.h To: Tom Tromey References: <1480395946-10924-1-git-send-email-tom@tromey.com> <1480395946-10924-2-git-send-email-tom@tromey.com> <87pola8bs7.fsf@tromey.com> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2016 18:11:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87pola8bs7.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2016-12/txt/msg00109.txt.bz2 On 12/02/2016 05:46 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > > Pedro> Can you please remove them and see what breaks? Odd that this would be > Pedro> something about Python, given the class is being used in Python code > Pedro> today? > > Yes, it's odd. If I comment out the nullptr_t overloads, I get build > failures like: > > ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/python/py-exitedevent.c:31:20: error: no match for ‘operator==’ (operand types are ‘gdbpy_ref {aka gdb::ref_ptr<_object, gdbpy_ref_policy>}’ and ‘long int’) > if (exited_event == NULL) > ^ > ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/common/gdb_ref_ptr.h:183:13: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed: > In file included from ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/python/py-ref.h:23:0, > from ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/python/py-event.h:27, > from ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/python/py-event.c:21: > ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/common/gdb_ref_ptr.h:171:13: note: candidate: template bool gdb::operator==(const T*, const gdb::ref_ptr&) > inline bool operator== (const T *self, const ref_ptr &other) > ^~~~~~~~ > > > I don't understand why it picks this particular candidate, but I think gcc will list you all candidates, mentioning why each one can't work. I.e., it likely tells you more further below? > re-reading it now I think my earlier theory is wrong. Does it still happen if you remove the cstddef include? Do you have your code in some branch? It seems none of the gdbpy_ref stuff is in master yet. Thanks, Pedro Alves