Re: pgadmin3 not compliant with gcc-3.4 (?)

[Raphaël Enrici <blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr>]

Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Well,
>
> seems GCC 3.4 isn't compliant with C++...

:)

> Raphaël Enrici wrote:
>
> >  >     EVT_CHECKBOX(XRCID("chkEnabled"),               dlgJob::OnChange)
> >  >     EVT_COMBOBOX(XRCID("cbJobclass"),               dlgJob::OnChange)
> <snip>
> >     class A
> >     {
> >     public:
> >       void pub_func();
> >     protected:
> >       void prot_func();
> >     private:
> >       void priv_func();
> >     };
> >
> >     class B : public A
> >     {
> >     public:
> >       void foo()
> >       {
> >         &A::pub_func;   // OK, pub_func is accessible through A
> >         &A::prot_func;  // error, cannot access prot_func through A
> >         &A::priv_func;  // error, cannot access priv_func through A
> >
> >         &B::pub_func;   // OK, pub_func is accessible through B
> >         &B::prot_func;  // OK, can access prot_func through B (within B)
> >         &B::priv_func;  // error, cannot access priv_func through B
> >       }
> >     };
>
>
> This is plain crazy. So I may call A::prot_func(), but not retrieve it's 
> address? What if I also have a B::prot_func?
> Sorry, this is a *bug*.

Seems gcc team does not agree...
Can you take a look at these please and tell what you understand ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15308
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11174
They are the ones coming to the conclusion quoted before.

Can you tell me where I can find the C++ spec they are all talking about 
please ?

Regards,
Raphaël