From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Received: (qmail 14593 invoked by uid 71); 12 Jan 2003 00:06:00 -0000 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 00:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030112000600.14590.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Nathanael Nerode Subject: Re: c++/6030: ... Reply-To: Nathanael Nerode X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00751.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/6030; it has been noted by GNATS. >>From neroden@twcny.rr.com Mon Jan 13 01:03:02 2003 From: Nathanael Nerode To: philippeb@videotron.ca, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: c++/6030: ... Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 18:57:18 -0500 I'm a little confused by all this, but note that the following seems to work: -- #include #include using namespace std; template void foo() { cout << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << endl; } int a = 0; int b(void) { cout << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << endl; } typedef int (* blah_fn) (void) ; int main() { foo(); foo(); } -- And so does the following: -- #include #include using namespace std; template void foo() { cout << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << endl; } int a = 0; int b(void) { cout << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << endl; } int main() { foo(); foo(); } -- This seems like a sufficient workaround for most any purpose. It also works if you replace the * by &. And it leaves me wondering about the validity of the original. :-)