From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-26714-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5570 invoked by alias); 23 Dec 2002 17:46:03 -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 5493 invoked by uid 71); 23 Dec 2002 17:46:03 -0000
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:46:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20021223174603.5490.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Janis Johnson <janis187@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: c++/8205: [3.2 regression] using declaration & mulitiple inheritance
Reply-To: Janis Johnson <janis187@us.ibm.com>
X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01243.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR c++/8205; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Janis Johnson <janis187@us.ibm.com>
To: hou_zhenyu@hotmail.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
   chicares@mindspring.com, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: c++/8205: [3.2 regression] using declaration & mulitiple inheritance
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:44:31 -0800

 The regression reported in PR c++/8205 still exists on the
 3.2 branch.  The patch that caused the bug to show up, and
 the patch that caused it to go away on the mainline, are
 shown here.  They are both very large so it's quite likely
 that this information isn't very useful.
 
 Here's the patch that caused the regression to show up:
 
 2001-11-25  Nathan Sidwell  <nathan@codesourcery.com>
 
         PR g++/3145
         * class.c
         * cp-tree.h
         * call.c
         * cvt.c
         * init.c
         * rtti.c
         * search.c
         * typeck.c
         * typeck2.c
 
 Here's the patch that caused it to go away on the mainline:
 
 2002-08-07  Mark Mitchell  <mark@codesourcery.com>
 
         Rework build_component_ref.
         * call.c
         * class.c
         * cp-tree.def
         * cp-tree.h
         * decl.c
         * decl2
         * error.c
         * except.c
         * init.c
         * method.c
         * parse.y
         * pt.c
         * search.c
         * semantics.c
         * spew.c
         * tree.c
         * typeck.c
         * typeck2.c
 
 Here's a small test case that causes the compiler to
 complain about valid code on i686-linux with the 3.2
 branch cc1plus:
 
 -------------------
 class A { public: int i; };
 class B {};
 class E : A, B { public: using A::i; };
 
 int main() {
   E e;
   e.i; // "`A' is an inaccessible base of `E'"
 }
 -------------------
 
 Output from the 3.2 branch compiler:
 
 8205.C: In function `int main()':
 8205.C:7: `A' is an inaccessible base of `E'
 
 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8205