This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: c++/795
- To: nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Subject: Re: c++/795
- From: Martin Sebor <sebor at roguewave dot com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:37:33 -0700
- CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <20001124141600.12709.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com>
I don't think it is ill-formed. From
http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#30:
Proposed Resolution (04/99): Append to 14.2 temp.names paragraph 5:
Furthermore, names of member templates shall not be prefixed by the keyword
template if the postfix-expression or qualified-id does not appear in the scope
of a template. [Note: just as is the case with the typename prefix, the template
prefix is allowed in cases where it is not strictly necessary; i.e., when the
expression on the left of the -> or ., or the nested-name-specifier is not
dependent on a template-parameter. ]
Based on the note I'd say it's allowed but not required. Since this issue is a
DR, I think it should be implemented.
Regards
Martin
nathan@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
>
> The following reply was made to PR c++/795; it has been noted by GNATS.
>
> From: nathan@gcc.gnu.org
> To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, sadowski@lucent.com
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: c++/795
> Date: 24 Nov 2000 14:08:23 -0000
>
> Synopsis: parse error in member template method
>
> State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->closed
> State-Changed-By: nathan
> State-Changed-When: Fri Nov 24 06:08:23 2000
> State-Changed-Why:
> oops, like Gaby says -- ill formed
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=795&database=gcc