From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26471 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2006 01:28:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 26412 invoked by uid 48); 27 Oct 2006 01:28:14 -0000 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 01:28:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20061027012814.26411.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c++/29607] [DR 224] [4.1/4.2 Regression] dependent name with base classes In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" 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 X-SW-Source: 2006-10/txt/msg02293.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-27 01:28 ------- (In reply to comment #9) > one of those patches introduces the regression on the 4.1 branch The backport of Nathan's patch caused it, though DR 224 is the questionable problem here and reading the standard currently (without that Defect report), this is actually invalid code. The testcase in PR 29469 comment #5, shows that Defect report is bogus and needs to be rethought. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29607