From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20877 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2003 18:32:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 20870 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2003 18:32:22 -0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 18:32:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20031124183222.20869.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "ian at wasabisystems dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20031124181040.13178.ian@airs.com> References: <20031124181040.13178.ian@airs.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/13178] Bogus C++ error message referring to operator 1 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg02158.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From ian at wasabisystems dot com 2003-11-24 18:32 ------- Subject: Re: Bogus C++ error message referring to operator 1 "bangerth at dealii dot org" writes: > PS: How did you get to write such code? Martin van Loewis once posted > a PR in which he showed that such function signatures are sometimes > even accepted by gcc, erroneously of course (this is PR 8856)... I recently wrote a new demangler, and I was trying to create a test case which used an outer template parameter as the result type of a templated conversion operator. So it's not real code. I just noticed the bogus error message during my attempts. I did eventually manage to do what I wanted. Ian -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13178