This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 22:57:41 -0400
- Subject: Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] PR 46206
- References: <52002B56 dot 4030206 at oracle dot com>
On 08/05/2013 06:46 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
and after this comment, both pairs of qualify_lookup are called in that
order. Thus I started seriously suspecting that something may be wrong
in the if-else above, that is, that we really want something with
iter->type *before* iter->value there too: the attached patchlet p works
for the testcase and passes bootstrap & test. Does it make sense to you?
Final observation: in many cases, like for example, variants of the
testcase with one less data member, what happens is that iter->type and
iter->value are *both* the same variant of the TYPE_DECL Bar, the one
which is fine, has DECL_IMPLICIT_TYPEDEF_P set.
That's strange. I would expect that to mean that we don't properly give
an error for a Bar data member declared after the typedef.