From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 477943858C2A; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 18:39:15 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 477943858C2A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1706294355;
	bh=3jKp8DHG2XHlRyDEFGRPjZ2BvuKt5F9KmSyjyYpVaXk=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=CbXxZ46izQdUpOy347HbTSoM8/pqTNgqzERyDsDZFfrIYIW0inqZSzKxshYBeXf6X
	 103M+X3CPJJ5w7DPZWDFpPxs9BXKu83MTVCf6rhO9vgim4eMjd7u3Ftqx5y9kKoZh5
	 XuntTRGXCfQ7d3uxbbVWP+5BaHQeZ06Ncl5SwZm4=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/113620] ICE with inner class template speciailization and
 depdent NSDMI
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 18:39:14 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113620-4-hnd4Yaf1BB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113620-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113620-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D113620

--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #5)
> Seems to be a name lookup issue ultimately:
>=20
> struct A {
>   template<class T, class U>
>   struct B;
>=20
>   template<class V>
>   struct B<int, V> {
>     int x =3D V::value; // error: 'V' has not been declared
>     int y =3D T::value; // no error!
>     int z =3D U::value; // no error!
>   };
> };

That would make sense on why it was rejected before GCC 4.9 even.

Now I wonder if this is related to the diagnostic issue mentioned in
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/643811.html even.=