------- Comment #3 from ian at airs dot com 2008-09-04 03:38 -------
Here is further argument from a programmer here. Any language lawyers want to
comment?
14.6.1 Locally declared names [temp.local]
1. Like normal (non-template) classes, class templates have an
injected-class-name (clause 9). The injected-class-name can be used with or
without a template-argument-list. When it is used without a
template-argument-list, it is equivalent to the injected-class-name followed by
the template-parameters of the class template enclosed in <>. When it is used
with a template-argument-list, it refers to the specified class template
specialization, which could be the current specialization or another
specialization.
It makes this code valid:
template <class T>
struct base {
typedef base b;
};
And now according to this:
9 Classes [class]
2 A class-name is inserted into the scope in which it is declared immediately
after the class-name is seen. The class-name is also inserted into the scope of
the class itself; this is known as the injected-class-name. For purposes of
access checking, the injected-class-name is treated as if it were a public
member name. A class-specifier is commonly referred to as a class definition. A
class is considered defined after the closing brace of its class-specifier has
been seen even though its member functions are in general not yet defined.
injected-class-name is public, therefore it is accessible in derived class. It
makes the example valid.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37350
