forked from boostorg/config
Added link to a new value-initialization compiler bug report: http://qc.embarcadero.com/wc/qcmain.aspx?d=83751
[SVN r61203]
This commit is contained in:
@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ namespace boost_no_complete_value_initialization
|
|||||||
return arg.data == 0;
|
return arg.data == 0;
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
// Equivalent to the struct TData from CodeGear bug report 51854
|
// Equivalent to the struct TData from CodeGear bug report 51854,
|
||||||
// "Value-initialization: POD struct should be zero-initialized",
|
// "Value-initialization: POD struct should be zero-initialized",
|
||||||
// reported by me (Niels Dekker, LKEB) in 2007:
|
// reported by me (Niels Dekker, LKEB) in 2007:
|
||||||
// http://qc.embarcadero.com/wc/qcmain.aspx?d=51854
|
// http://qc.embarcadero.com/wc/qcmain.aspx?d=51854
|
||||||
@ -372,6 +372,15 @@ namespace boost_no_complete_value_initialization
|
|||||||
public:
|
public:
|
||||||
value_initializer()
|
value_initializer()
|
||||||
:
|
:
|
||||||
|
// Note: CodeGear/Borland may produce a warning, W8039, for each data member
|
||||||
|
// whose type is an array type, saying "Constructor initializer list ignored".
|
||||||
|
// If it does, it probably won't value-initialize those arrays, as reported
|
||||||
|
// by me (Niels Dekker, LKEB) in 2010, report 83751, "Value-initialization:
|
||||||
|
// arrays should have each element value-initialized",
|
||||||
|
// http://qc.embarcadero.com/wc/qcmain.aspx?d=83751
|
||||||
|
// On the other hand, Microsoft Visual C++ may produce warnings of type C4351,
|
||||||
|
// saying "new behavior: elements of array '...' will be default initialized",
|
||||||
|
// which is actually the right behavior!
|
||||||
int_struct(),
|
int_struct(),
|
||||||
m_enum_holder(),
|
m_enum_holder(),
|
||||||
m_enum_holder_array(),
|
m_enum_holder_array(),
|
||||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user