From: "Markus Schöpflin" <no.spam@spam.spam>
Subject: Re: Differences in finalization of controlled objects between gcc 4.6 and gcc 4.7
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 15:59:14 +0200
Date: 2012-07-19T15:59:14+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ju93rg$43j$1@speranza.aioe.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 50080f7b$0$9525$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net
Am 19.07.2012 15:45, schrieb Georg Bauhaus:
> On 19.07.12 14:23, Markus Schï¿œpflin wrote:
>> Is there a way to have the objects created in place directly in the array?
>
> Can you make the type limited?
No, I need to be able to copy them around. But IMHO that shouldn't make a
difference in this case, the compiler should be able to figure out that it can
construct the objects in place, shouldn't it?
Surprisingly (at least for me) it *does* make a difference when I define T as
type T is new ADA.FINALIZATION.LIMITED_CONTROLLED with null record;
Then the output looks like this with both versions of gcc:
> ./test_ctrl
BFBE03D4: I
BFBE03D8: I
BFBE03D8: F
BFBE03D4: F
Regards,
Markus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-26 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-19 12:23 Differences in finalization of controlled objects between gcc 4.6 and gcc 4.7 Markus Schöpflin
2012-07-19 13:45 ` Georg Bauhaus
2012-07-19 13:59 ` Markus Schöpflin [this message]
2012-07-19 14:48 ` Georg Bauhaus
2012-07-20 2:56 ` Randy Brukardt
2012-07-20 2:59 ` Randy Brukardt
2012-07-27 7:02 ` Markus Schöpflin
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox