From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-25619-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7520 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2002 16:06:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 7506 invoked by uid 71); 3 Dec 2002 16:06:03 -0000
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 08:06:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20021203160603.7505.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: c++/8772: Segmentation fault on 3 lines of template code
Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00148.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR c++/8772; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, <zack@codesourcery.com>, <pcarlini@unitus.it>,
   <sneechy@hotmail.com>, <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: c++/8772: Segmentation fault on 3 lines of template code
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:53:58 -0600 (CST)

 > |     However, just for the record: I fail to see how this can be
 > |     made legal: when you write A<n>::B to denote the template
 > |     type, B is a template dependent type, and one would think
 > |     one has to write a "typename" somewhere. But then we have
 > |       typename A<n>::B
 > |     which is not the name of a type, but of a template. I don't
 > |     know what the standard says here, but I don't see a way to
 > |     make it legal in any case.
 > 
 > This case seems to be forgotten by the standard.  I think the
 > following should make GCC happy.
 > 
 >   template<int n>
 >      struct D  {
 >        enum { 
 >          v = C<A<n>::template B>::v
 >        };
 >      };
 > 
 > Note the "template" keyword in front of B.
 
 Right, it does.
 
 
 > The closest you can find in the standard is 14.2/
 > 
 >     4
 >       When the name of a member template specialization appears after . or
                                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 I think this is why you said it seems to have been forgotten? After all it 
 speaks about a specialization, which it is not in the code you posted.
 
 If you are sure that this is an oversight, why don't you bring it up with 
 the ISO committee?
 
 Thanks for the clarification
   Wolfgang
 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Wolfgang Bangerth              email:           bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
                                www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth