From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8746 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2003 09:46:01 -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 8730 invoked by uid 71); 20 Jan 2003 09:46:01 -0000 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030120094601.8729.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Volker Reichelt Subject: Re: c++/8772: Segmentation fault on 3 lines of template code Reply-To: Volker Reichelt X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg01110.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/8772; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Volker Reichelt To: gdr@integrable-solutions.net Cc: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, sneechy@hotmail.com, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/8772: Segmentation fault on 3 lines of template code Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:41:42 +0100 On 18 Jan, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Well, the diagnostic is still incorrect; I believe we should rephrase > teh synopsis to indicate that Done. FYI, a short summary of the audit-trail: GCC issues: * The code is illegal, and caused an ICE since gcc 2.95.x. * The ICE was fixed with the new parser, but the error message which is issued now, is misleading: PR8772.cc:3: error: type/value mismatch at argument 1 in template parameter list for `template > class F> struct C' PR8772.cc:3: error: expected a type, got `A< >::B' (We do expect a template - not a type.) So we still have a bug. ISO-Standard issues: * There seems to be no way to make the code legal according to the standard. This was reported to the committee by Gaby. The proposed solution - using C::template B> - is already accepted since gcc 3.1. Regards, Volker