https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109181
--- Comment #5 from waffl3x <waffl3x at protonmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #3)
> A workaround is to just remove the unneeded 'template' after the :: in this
> case. Or is there an example where the template keyword is needed that we
> incorrectly reject?
In my original use case, A in `inline constexpr bool go = requires{typename
A::template B<int>;};` would have been dependent, I included the template
keyword because of that but it should have occurred to me that the example I
presented doesn't need it, I'm not sure what the standard requires for this
sort of thing though.
When I reduce I just remove everything that isn't required to get the result
I'm looking for, I should have realized that changing the semantics of the
example might create confusion and in the future I think I will also include a
reduced version that comes closer to the problem I actually encountered, I
imagine that it will be helpful even if it's not actually the most reduced
version.
I'll try to create an example that reflects my use case better as soon as I
can.
