2014-10-09 15:34 GMT+02:00 Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>: [...] >> If the USING_DECL is returned, the code below will be rejected as >> expected, but the error message will not mention the line where the >> USING_DECL appears as the previous definition, but at the target >> declaration of the USING_DECL instead. > > > I think that's what happens if you strip the USING_DECL and return what it > points to; if you return the USING_DECL itself that shouldn't happen (though > then the caller needs to be able to deal with getting a USING_DECL).
[Sorry for the delay] Humm, l_a_c_t returns a TYPE upon success, shall I change it and return a DECL instead ? -- Fabien
