Summary: | [DR 407] Bogus diagnostic for typedef name in elaborated type specifier | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | gcc | Reporter: | Matt Austern <austern> |
Component: | c++ | Assignee: | Not yet assigned to anyone <unassigned> |
Status: | NEW --- | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | egallager, fang, gcc-bugs, mpolacek, webrown.cpp |
Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | diagnostic, rejects-valid |
Version: | 4.0.0 | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
See Also: |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93816 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46206 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11036 |
||
Host: | Target: | ||
Build: | Known to work: | ||
Known to fail: | Last reconfirmed: | 2024-02-06 00:00:00 |
Description
Matt Austern
2005-01-20 01:51:48 UTC
I've raised this issue on the C++ standardization committee's core language reflector. I now find it a little less clear than I did before. This is closely related to open issue 407. See http://www.open- std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#407 http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#407 is no longer open, I think [2] should be accepted Un-suspending, and changing from accepts-invalid to rejects-valid. Both [1] and [2] are valid now and should be accepted. (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) > Un-suspending, and changing from accepts-invalid to rejects-valid. > > Both [1] and [2] are valid now and should be accepted. Still a diagnostic issue even it's now rejects-valid instead of accepts-valid, IMO. |