From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 104447 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2018 19:18:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 104438 invoked by uid 89); 27 Apr 2018 19:18:29 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=HCc:D*comcast.net, H*Ad:D*comcast.net, binutilsgdbgit, binutils-gdb.git X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Apr 2018 19:18:28 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id w3RJIMsr023622 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2018 15:18:26 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id F0B761EF61; Fri, 27 Apr 2018 15:18:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from simark.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 839151E4F4; Fri, 27 Apr 2018 15:18:20 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 19:39:00 -0000 From: Simon Marchi To: Pedro Alves Cc: Paul Koning , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB 8.1 build error In-Reply-To: References: <214C80CC-1173-41F6-AAA1-39C9D39E28B2@comcast.net> <454707570722fc0220074c0eca015a8f@polymtl.ca> Message-ID: X-Sender: simon.marchi@polymtl.ca User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.4 X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Fri, 27 Apr 2018 19:18:22 +0000 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-04/txt/msg00032.txt.bz2 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: > > 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. 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. Simon