From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15556 invoked by alias); 9 May 2003 00:36:01 -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 15542 invoked by uid 71); 9 May 2003 00:36:00 -0000 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 00:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030509003600.15541.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: c++/6758: [2003-01-01] ICE on nested type in template declaration Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00682.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/6758; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, , Giovanni Bajo Cc: Subject: Re: c++/6758: [2003-01-01] ICE on nested type in template declaration Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 19:30:59 -0500 (CDT) > To be fair, the code is legal in 3.3 because of the implicit typename > extension. I guess this bug should be kept open (not analyzed - there is > no testcase), in case someone wants to fix the ICE in the 3.3 branch. Well, why? The code ICEd since at least 2.95, so it's not a regression. It's fixed on mainline. Bugs that are not regressions are not going to be fixed on 3.3 branch, so why keep it open? W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ices.utexas.edu www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/