public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "scottbaldwin at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/32204] friend from global namespace in template class ignored
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 08:52:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-32204-4-egmSTzEdpa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-32204-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32204

--- Comment #8 from etherice <scottbaldwin at gmail dot com> 2012-10-27 08:52:10 UTC ---
In MSVC's defense, the standard is vague (or insufficient) in this regard for
'friend class' declarations. It says:

"If a friend declaration appears in a local class (9.8) and the name specified
is an unqualified name, a prior declaration is looked up without considering
scopes that are outside the innermost enclosing non-class scope."
...
"For a friend class declaration, if there is no prior declaration, the class
that is specified belongs to the innermost enclosing non-class scope, but if it
is subsequently referenced, its name is not found by name lookup until a
matching declaration is provided in the innermost enclosing nonclass scope."

The standard *should* specify whether the 'friend class declaration' case
applies to qualified names. For example:

namespace ns {
  class NSClass {
    friend class ::SomeGlobalClass;
  };
}

Since ::SomeGlobalClass is qualified (via scope resolution operator) it
explicitly belongs to the global namespace. However, the standard says that it
shall "belong to the innermost enclosing non-class scope", which is a
contradiction (or nonsense). This is why the standard *should* specify a case
for qualified vs unqualified names in friend class declarations (as it does for
normal friend declarations).

The assumption MSVC makes not only seems reasonable, but is also convenient for
developers as it allows *hidden* forward declarations of names in outer
namespaces. This avoids having to make an unnecessary explicit forward
declaration.

Perhaps GCC should "interpret" this part of the standard similarly.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-10-27  8:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-32204-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2011-01-17  6:48 ` jag-gnu at jag dot dreamhost.com
2012-03-26 21:24 ` dpiepgrass at mentoreng dot com
2012-03-26 21:32 ` dpiepgrass at mentoreng dot com
2012-03-26 23:52 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-03-27  0:44 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-27  8:12 ` scottbaldwin at gmail dot com
2012-10-27  8:52 ` scottbaldwin at gmail dot com [this message]
2012-10-27 13:13 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-27 13:39 ` scottbaldwin at gmail dot com
2007-06-04 12:01 [Bug c++/32204] New: " klaus dot kretschel at dlr dot de
2009-12-08 23:11 ` [Bug c++/32204] " redi at gcc dot gnu dot org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-32204-4-egmSTzEdpa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).