This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: PR180

To: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>
Subject: Re: PR180
From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
Date: 08 May 2001 03:43:01 -0300
Cc: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
References: <20010505180803.A17376@daikokuya.demon.co.uk><20010507010413.B32241@disaster.jaj.com>

On May  7, 2001, Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com> wrote:

> On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 06:08:03PM +0100, Neil Booth wrote:
>> However, the submitter claims the code is incorrect, and g++ compiles
>> it without diagnostics.  It would be nice to re-word / close this PR;
>> whichever is appropriate - I don't know enough C++ to call it.

> I don't know whether I'm an expert, but I strongly suspect that this code
> should be rejected.  I can't find anything in the standard which would
> allow it.

Agreed.  A::B is not a class, it's a template, and since there is no
default for the template argument, it can't be omitted.  A
definition for A::B::f just doesn't make any sense at all.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me

References:
- PR180
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: PR180
  - From: Phil Edwards

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]