------- Additional Comments From igodard at pacbell dot net 2005-03-05 09:37 ------- Ref comment #4: yes, using "::" clears the diagnostic, but why does the member in one base collide with the direct reference to another explict base? Isn't the base name itself in the derived's scope, superceding the names in the base scopes? That is, from baz are foo and its member bar in the same scope (which is apparently what the compiler thinks), or is foo in baz's scope while the member bar is in baz::foo's as seems more reasonable?
(Yes, I know, reasonableness is non-standard :-) Ivan -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20330
