Re: [orbitcpp-list] warnings

[Phil D. <ph...@us...>]

Laszlo Molnar writes:
 > Hi Folks!

Hi Laslo,


 > 
 > Some days ago I tried to investigate why gcc gives tons of warnings
 > during compilation of orbitc++ generated stuff. After I found the main
 > cause (those const/non const cast operators) I looked at some other
 > orbs how they solve this problem. I found special ifdefs in both mico
 > and omniorb, unfortunately none of those solutions were 100% perfect.
 > Anyway when I do something similar for orbitc++, I was not able to
 > compile everything :(
 > 
 > And unfortunately gcc 2.96 issues these warnings too :(
 > 

I need to do some work in this area. Any info on what sort of hacks
mico and omniorb use (or where to look for them) would be very
helpful.


 > But there is another kind of warnings, which is caused by this
 > stuff in pass_stubs.cc:
 > 
    [example snipped]

 > Here gcc says, that there is no point to provide
 > 
 >    operator Base&()
 > 
 > for the derived classes, because it won't execute them, but do the
 > right thing itself ;)
 > 
 > So I guess, this code could be safely removed.
 > 

Hmmm - I suspect not. The thing is that we aren't using real C++
objects, we're casting ORBit C objects into C++ ones, and using these
cast operators to insure that the compiler doesn't try to do smart
thunking in the case of multiple inheritance downcasts.  This provides
a good speed increase over wrapping the C objects in C++ ones.

Does the 'everything' test in orbitcpp CVS work with gcc 2.96? 

Thanks for your work,

Cheers,

Phil.