> From: iant@xxxxxxxxxx
>
> Nathan Ridge writes:
>
> > Consider the following fragment of invalid code:
> >
> > struct A
> > {
> > struct B {};
> >
> > int g();
> >
> > B f() { return g(); }
> > };
> >
> > GCC 4.5's error message is "error: conversion from 'int' to non-scalar type 'A::B' requested".
> >
> > GCC 4.6's error message is "error: could not convert 'A::g()' to 'A::B'".
> >
> > The 4.6 error message no longer mentions the actual type, int, that
> > cannot be converted to the declared return type, insteading mentioning
> > the expression yielding that type, A::g().
> >
> > What is the rationale for this change?
> >
> > I think 4.5's error message is more useful because you can see from it
> > exactly what conversion (int to A::B) is failing. With 4.6's error message,
> > to find out why the conversion is failing you now have to look up the
> > return value of A::g() in your code.
> >
> > The difference becomes more pronounced with more complex examples.
> > For example, for the code in PR 49003,
> >
> > GCC 4.5: "error: conversion from 'vector::const_iterator' to non-scalar type 'vector::iterator' requested"
> >
> > GCC 4.6: "error: could not convert '((const block*)this)->block::v.vector::begin()' to 'vector::iterator'"
> >
> > Quite clearly, the 4.5 error message is better.
> >
> > Having said that, I think the phrasing of the 4.6 error is better,
> > so the best option would be:
> >
> > error: could not convert 'vector::const_iterator' to 'vector::iterator'
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
>
> Please file a bug report. See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ . Thanks.
>
> Ian
I have filed http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49117.
Regards,
Nate.
