Gcc Error Extra Qualification
Contents |
here for a quick overview of the site Help Center Detailed answers to any questions you might have Meta Discuss the workings and policies of this site About Us Learn more
Extra Qualification In Resume
about Stack Overflow the company Business Learn more about hiring developers or posting ads extra qualification in cv with us Stack Overflow Questions Jobs Documentation Tags Users Badges Ask Question x Dismiss Join the Stack Overflow Community Stack Overflow extra qualification on member xcode is a community of 4.7 million programmers, just like you, helping each other. Join them; it only takes a minute: Sign up extra qualification error in C++ up vote 54 down vote favorite 4
C++ Cannot Be Overloaded
I have a member function that is defined as follows: Value JSONDeserializer::ParseValue(TDR type, const json_string& valueString); When I compile the source, I get: error: extra qualification 'JSONDeserializer::' on member 'ParseValue' What is this? How do I remove this error? c++ g++ compiler-errors share|improve this question edited Feb 27 '15 at 19:30 Ian R. O'Brien 3,10353058 asked Apr 12 '11 at 22:28 prosseek 42.4k105350627 add a comment| 4 Answers 4 active
C++ Undefined Reference To
oldest votes up vote 97 down vote accepted This is because you have the following code: class JSONDeserializer { Value JSONDeserializer::ParseValue(TDR type, const json_string& valueString); }; This is not valid C++ but Visual Studio seems to accept it. You need to change it to the following code to be able to compile it with a standard compliant compiler (gcc is more compliant to the standard on this point). class JSONDeserializer { Value ParseValue(TDR type, const json_string& valueString); }; The error come from the fact that JSONDeserializer::ParseValue is a qualified name (a name with a namespace qualification), and such a name is forbidden as a method name in a class. share|improve this answer edited Dec 30 '13 at 13:11 answered Apr 12 '11 at 22:39 Sylvain Defresne 23.2k35574 Is there any way to make Visual Studio warn about this? –altumano Jan 23 '15 at 8:53 1 @altumano: No, but Cppcheck can do that and also detect non-ASCII characters in identifiers which helps maintain code more portable to gcc. –sharptooth Jan 26 '15 at 14:08 @sharptooth: thanks, Cppcheck can indeed detect those errors. There is even a Visual Studio plugin for Cppcheck (but it's buggy and do not detect in all files) –altum
here for a quick overview of the site Help Center Detailed answers to any questions cpp class you might have Meta Discuss the workings and policies of
Constructor C++
this site About Us Learn more about Stack Overflow the company Business Learn more about hiring c++ operator developers or posting ads with us Stack Overflow Questions Jobs Documentation Tags Users Badges Ask Question x Dismiss Join the Stack Overflow Community Stack Overflow is http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5642367/extra-qualification-error-in-c a community of 4.7 million programmers, just like you, helping each other. Join them; it only takes a minute: Sign up extra qualification member GCC [closed] up vote 3 down vote favorite I know the common answer for this question, but for some reason I get the error when using the right syntax, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13465558/extra-qualification-member-gcc on Code::Blocks, I'll post a sample to show I'm not bluffing: class BulletPlacer : sf::Drawable { public: BulletPlacer(); BulletPlacer(const unsigned Quantity); ~BulletPlacer(); }; That was a small portion of the hpp file. BulletPlacer::BulletPlacer() :Amount(0), Min(0) {} BulletPlacer::BulletPlacer(const unsigned Quantity) :Amount(Quantity), Min(0) { Bullet shot; ShotVec.reserve(Amount); for(unsigned i = 0; i < Amount; ++i) { ShotVec.push_back(shot); } } BulletPlacer::~BulletPlacer() { PolVecV.clear(); ShotVec.clear(); } And that was the cpp. It compiled fine until I began refactoring the class and I get the error with all the methods. I also get other errors that have no place at all and I get them with all the functions in the class. I even redownloaded a GCC version only to find that it gives me the exact same result. Here's the simplified version of the error log: error: extra qualification 'BulletPlacer::' on member 'BulletPlacer' [-fpermissive]| error: 'BulletPlacer::BulletPlacer()' cannot be overloaded| error: with 'BulletPlacer::BulletPlacer()'| And it gets repeated like this with all fu
here for a quick overview of the site Help Center Detailed answers to any questions you might have Meta Discuss the workings and policies of this site About Us Learn more about Stack Overflow the company Business Learn more about hiring http://stackoverflow.com/questions/18031285/extra-qualification-errors-how-warranted-by-the-standard developers or posting ads with us Stack Overflow Questions Jobs Documentation Tags Users Badges Ask Question x Dismiss Join the Stack Overflow Community Stack Overflow is a community of 4.7 million programmers, just like you, helping each other. Join them; http://gcc.gnu.org/PR26785 it only takes a minute: Sign up “extra qualification” errors. How warranted by the Standard? up vote 4 down vote favorite This similar ill-fated question got comments and short answers, before it was closed, to the effect: Because that's extra qualification how the language is defined. Here I am asking for the evidence within the C++ Standard that it is so defined. gcc 4.8.1 and clang 3.3 alike, with default diagnostic options or stricter, give errors for extra qualification or explicit qualification on code such as: struct x { int x::i; // Error: gcc/clang: "extra" }; int ::y; // Error: gcc: "explicit", clang: "extra" gcc has diagnosed such errors since v4.1. But popular compilers are not unanimous about these errors. extra qualification in MSVC++ 2012 (Nov CTP) gives an error at int ::y; but even with /Wall, gives no diagnostic at all int x::i; - the kind of case that the ill-fated questioner was raising - and that difference suggests deliberation by the MS compiler writers. How are these errors warranted by the Standard, if they are? References to the C++11 Standard will suffice. An answer might be "They follow from grammar". In that case, please try to show how they follow from the grammar and feel free to use the Standard's grammatical classifications. I have a copy and will re-read it to understand the explanation. c++ c++11 compiler-errors standards qualified-name share|improve this question edited Aug 6 '13 at 22:13 asked Aug 3 '13 at 9:18 Mike Kinghan 14.7k53059 2 I believe this is a dupe. It's illegal (per quote in my answer in the dupe) but it'll be allowed in C++1y (see link in litb's answer). –jrok Aug 3 '13 at 9:27 I agree that I dupe the linked Q, and it is very helpful. –Mike Kinghan Aug 3 '13 at 11:34 @jrok this is a different question. What is shown in this question stays invalid in C++14. –Johannes Schaub - litb Aug 6 '13 at 20:49 add a comment| 2 Answers 2 active oldest votes up vote 4 down vote accepted A qualified name in C++ always must refer to a pre
Login: [x] User account creation filtered due to spam. Bug26785 - "extra qualification" error gives line number of end of declaration Summary: "extra qualification" error gives line number of end of declaration Status: RESOLVED FIXED Alias: None Product: gcc Classification: Unclassified Component: c++ (show other bugs) Version: 4.1.0 Importance: P3 minor Target Milestone: 4.4.0 Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone URL: Keywords: diagnostic Depends on: Blocks: Reported: 2006-03-21 17:03 UTC by Martin Michlmayr Modified: 2008-08-06 16:42 UTC (History) CC List: 4 users (show) debian-gcc gcc-bugs manu mueller See Also: Host: Target: Build: Known to work: Known to fail: Last reconfirmed: 2006-03-21 17:06:09 Attachments Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug. Description Martin Michlmayr 2006-03-21 17:03:08 UTC The line number mentioned in the "extra qualification" error is not ideal. Instead of showing the line number on which the extra qualification actually occurs it shows the last line of the declaration. (sid)6102:tbm@deprecation: ~] cat > test.cpp class foo { foo::foo(int a, int b, int c); }; int main() { } (sid)6103:tbm@deprecation: ~] g++ test.cpp test.cpp:4: error: extra qualification `foo::' on member `foo' I'd like to see "test.cpp:2: ..." here. Presumably it checks things like that after reading a complete declaration. I would have thought it could track what the first line of the declaration was though. seen with: gcc version 4.1.0 20060219 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1-0exp9) gcc version 4.0.3 (Debian 4.0.3-1) [using -pedantic] Comment 1 Andrew Pinski 2006-03-21 17:05:28 UTC This is the crazy parser getting the line number "wrong". Comment 2 Dirk Mueller 2006-10-16 15:22:11 UTC ehm, this is the same with any warning/error message? why would this case be special? Comment 3 Martin Michlmayr 2006-10-16 15:38:57 UTC (In reply to comment #2) > ehm, this is the same with any warning/error message? why would this case be > special? I never noticed before, but it would still be nice to get this changed. Comment 4 Manuel López-Ibáñez 2008-08-06 16:38:38 UTC Subject: Bug 26785 Author: manu Date: Wed Aug 6 16:37:06 2008 New Revision: 138816 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=138816 Log: 2008-08-06 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez