--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-01
03:34 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> (It actually prints the message twice, but that's PR 19375)
Actually it was not, it was a related case but we still get the message twice,
I filed PR 21312 with a
modifed testcas
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-11
17:08 ---
No this is valid code. We don't implement full using semantics.
This might be related to PR 6936.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From lerdsuwa at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-12
10:46 ---
The bug is simply incorrect error message logic.
The 'protected' comes from the point that 'A::i' is
declared, not the actual access computed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2012-04-15
17:17:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> You should write to Jason directly, as he is probably the only person in the
> world that understands the C++ FE well enough to answer this.
>
> (And am I t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-04-15
17:41:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > You should write to Jason directly, as he is probably the only person in the
> > world that understands the C++ FE well en
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
--- Comment #8 from fabien at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-15 18:24:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > (In reply to comment #5)
> > > You should write to Jason directly, as he is probably the only person in
> > > the
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
fabien at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
--- Comment #10 from fabien at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrey Belevantsev from comment #9)
> Another test case of the same issue (both clang and icc compile this fine):
It is not the same issue as the protected keyword is not involved. (A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
--- Comment #11 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to fabien from comment #10)
> The testcase is not valid, as a using declaration shall refer to a direct
> base class, which is not the case in 'using ns::Base::i' (the namespace ns
> does not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
FWIW Harald's analysis looks right to me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
--- Comment #15 from Anthony Sharp ---
This should now be fixed as part of my patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=be246ac2d26e1cb072f205bf97d5eac150220f3f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19377
Anthony Sharp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anthonysharp15 at gmail dot com
--- Comm
16 matches
Mail list logo
