From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22867 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2003 17:26:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 22844 invoked by uid 71); 8 Jan 2003 17:26:04 -0000 Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 17:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030108172604.22832.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: c++/9230: Friend definitions in template classes Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00549.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/9230; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de, , , , , Cc: Subject: Re: c++/9230: Friend definitions in template classes Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 11:20:21 -0600 (CST) > As I read paragraph 14.6.5.1 in the standard, this is the expected behavior: > > > Friend classes or functions can be declared within a class template. When > > a template is instantiated, the names of its friends are treated as if > > the specialization had been explicitly declared at its point of instantiation. That leaves no wishes for clarity unheard. > Convinced, Wolfgang? Yes :-) I just did not know where to look exactly. Do you want to close it or should I do that? W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth/