From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2802 invoked by alias); 14 Feb 2013 14:42:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 1034 invoked by uid 48); 14 Feb 2013 14:42:21 -0000 From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/56323] [C++11] cannot compile inherited constructor for typedef'ed base class Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:42:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Keywords Status Last reconfirmed CC Ever Confirmed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2013-02/txt/msg01437.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56323 Jonathan Wakely changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |rejects-valid Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2013-02-14 CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2013-02-14 14:42:20 UTC --- I think [class.qual]/2 says both C and D are valid. C is valid because it is a using-declaration that is a member-declaration and the name specified after the nested-name-specifier is the same as the identifier in the last component of the nested-name-specifier. D is valid because the name specified after the nested-name-specifier is the injected-class-name of A. In both cases the using-declaration names the constructor, so it declares a set of inheriting constructors.