------- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-11-12 11:27 ------- (In reply to comment #2) > As for the original bug report: it's easy to verify by inspecting the source > that _Mem_fn has no base class as required.
I beg to disagree. Have you really checked the actual versions of it for member function taking no argument and taking one argument? If I do that in the straightforward way, that is looking at the -E output, the expected bases are there. In other terms, functional_iterate.h looks fine to me. > Hope this gives you what you need. Well, to date, not really, to be honest. I would appreciate a decently sized testcase (eventually, what are we going to put in the testsuite, otherwise?!?) or at least reaching a minimum of consensus about the matter by looking at the sources... Thanks in advance for your help. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24800
