From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-32427-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 19626 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2003 23:16:01 -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 19607 invoked by uid 71); 31 Mar 2003 23:16:01 -0000
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:26:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20030331231601.19606.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: "Darren Reed \(OSE\)" <darrenr@optimation.com.au>
Subject: RE: c++/10273: g++ fails to compile sort() with a template operator that takes a pointer
Reply-To: "Darren Reed \(OSE\)" <darrenr@optimation.com.au>
X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg02157.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR c++/10273; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Darren Reed \(OSE\)" <darrenr@optimation.com.au>
To: <bangerth@dealii.org>, <darrenr@optimation.com.au>, <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>,
        <gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>, <nobody@gcc.gnu.org>, <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc:  
Subject: RE: c++/10273: g++ fails to compile sort() with a template operator that takes a pointer
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 09:06:35 +1000

 Is it unreasonable to ask for a better error message in this case ?
 Or perhaps better checking of templates ?  (This would probably cause
 a more accurate error message to be output.)
 
 Darren
 
 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: bangerth@dealii.org [mailto:bangerth@dealii.org]
 > Sent: Tuesday, 1 April 2003 2:00 AM
 > To: darrenr@optimation.com.au; gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org;
 > gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org; nobody@gcc.gnu.org
 > Subject: Re: c++/10273: g++ fails to compile sort() with a template
 > operator that takes a pointer
 > 
 > 
 > Synopsis: g++ fails to compile sort() with a template operator that takes a pointer
 > 
 > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
 > State-Changed-By: bangerth
 > State-Changed-When: Mon Mar 31 15:59:41 2003
 > State-Changed-Why:
 >     Not a bug, but for a different reason than what Gaby
 >     suspected. This
 >       template <class ClassName *> struct xLess
 >     is indeed a valid template declaration, since a class named
 >     "ClassName" has been declared previously, but it is a
 >     template with a value-parameter, not a type-parameter.
 >     
 >     Once you change that, change some pointers to values
 >     and make ClassName::x public, the code compiles.
 >     
 >     W.
 > 
 > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10273
 > 
 >