From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
Cc: Paul Koning <paulkoning@comcast.net>, gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: GDB 8.1 build error
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 20:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <620c4459-0452-309b-925f-d18a37b49f5b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e687057d79e17944e9a77912fd22bac0@polymtl.ca>
On 04/27/2018 08:18 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
> On 2018-04-27 15:08, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> Oh, wait.... Your build line has no "-W" at all, it has "-w" instead??
>> How did that happen?
>
> When --disable-build-warnings is used, we don't put any -W/-Wno- flags:
>
> https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=blob;f=gdb/warning.m4;h=f176a3291aa68acf0122609531abb4652425525b;hb=HEAD#l62
>
>> Right, that's ill-formed, thus a gdb bug. A const POD must either
>> be initialized, or have a user-declared default constructor.
>>
>> So adding an explicit initializer like clang is suggesting should fix it:
>>
>> Â const any_static_probe_ops any_static_probe_ops = {};
>
> In the stackoverflow answer I pointed to in my other messages talks about a defect in the standard that was fixed.
Oh, I had run into this in the past in context of an
empty struct and thought that the bug fix was for that
case only?
http://open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#253
Oh geez, I assumed that any_static_probe_ops was a POD with
function pointers, but now that I look, I see virtual
methods...
Anyhow.
And it seems like the compilers aligned with the new behavior. So is it really a GDB bug? In any case, I have no problem adding the explicit initialization to be friendly with older compilers.
Not sure anymore. But in any case I have no problems with
the explicit initialization either.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-27 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-27 18:02 Paul Koning
2018-04-27 18:38 ` Simon Marchi
2018-04-27 18:57 ` Paul Koning
2018-04-27 19:01 ` Paul Koning
2018-04-27 19:08 ` Simon Marchi
2018-04-27 19:18 ` Paul Koning
2018-04-27 20:41 ` Paul Koning
2018-04-27 19:10 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-27 19:39 ` Simon Marchi
2018-04-27 20:00 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2018-04-27 20:16 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-27 20:24 ` Simon Marchi
2018-04-27 20:41 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-27 20:48 ` Simon Marchi
2018-05-02 9:42 ` Pedro Alves
2018-05-02 10:13 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-27 19:10 ` Simon Marchi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=620c4459-0452-309b-925f-d18a37b49f5b@redhat.com \
--to=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=paulkoning@comcast.net \
--cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox