From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 9D88D3870905; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:47:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9D88D3870905 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1593164854; bh=JSmeN2/6b0blRRYyFDOJuQtD0wLYwSjYqlats71HHfU=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=YUTxAr7/dqnsm8wPqvVAV7WwobEE/mJf0Dbqx2cjMxx0mxP0P4AGUvuLD6dYUymlI MEwnoq5BLHr5QT6voGUpkRUYyOIEw67bYhzJeUbRVRkzlpHhDFUpKq6lULdzsuc26t vDX9spO2zvqqys4EjyERXfFjiRBCRYaLxmKmUd/o= From: "haoxintu at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/95809] GCC treats inline namespace declaration as "ambiguous" Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:47:34 +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: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: haoxintu at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED 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: In-Reply-To: References: 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 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:47:34 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95809 --- Comment #3 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #2) > yup, dr2061 made that ill-formed.=20=20 >=20 > p1701 (wg21.link/p1701) documents the behaviour and it appears EWG is > exploring another avenue to resolve the underlying problem 2061 was > attempting to fix. Thank you, Nathan, so this is a valid code, right?=