From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25516 invoked by alias); 10 May 2004 19:55:34 -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 25501 invoked by uid 48); 10 May 2004 19:55:34 -0000 Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 18:53:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040510195534.25500.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030806091852.11828.benko@sztaki.hu> References: <20030806091852.11828.benko@sztaki.hu> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/11828] [3.4/3.5 regression] qualified dependent name looked up too early X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-05/txt/msg00988.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-05-10 19:55 ------- >>From [temp.dep.candidate]: For a function call that depends on a template parameter, if the function name is an "unqualified-id" but not a template-id, the candidate functions are found using the usual lookup rules (3.4.1, 3.4.2) except that: I think this is more relevent than any other part. I think the unqualified-id part tells that the function name has to be unqualified. -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|[3.4 regression] qualified |[3.4/3.5 regression] |dependent name looked up too|qualified dependent name |early |looked up too early Target Milestone|3.4.0 |3.4.1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11828