http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56323
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2013-02-14
CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-14
14:42:20 UTC ---
I think [class.qual]/2 says both C and D are valid.
C is valid because it is a using-declaration that is a member-declaration and
the name specified after the nested-name-specifier is the same as the
identifier in the last component of the nested-name-specifier.
D is valid because the name specified after the nested-name-specifier is the
injected-class-name of A.
In both cases the using-declaration names the constructor, so it declares a set
of inheriting constructors.
