http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9050
--- Comment #14 from Johannes Schaub <schaub.johannes at googlemail dot com> 2012-04-01 14:14:46 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > Jason, does http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1435 > not render the explicit specialization ill-formed for C++11TC1? It only allows > a simple identifier, and not a template-id. FWIW I don't like the resolution of that issue. For a qualified-id, the injected-class-name is an excellent way for us to know when and when not we name a constructor, and it is entirely based on name-lookup rules; I don't see the need to dictate that in clause 12. Only for an unqualified-id, we actually need the rule to know when we declare a constructor. The allowed decl-specifiers in a constructor declaration can be stated separately.
