https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56100
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #3)
> I wonder if in such cases would it simply make sense to suppress the warning
> basing on the locations
I think we want to suppress the warning on instantiation even if the order is
reversed: given
int foo;
template <typename T>
struct bar
{
void qux () { baz (); }
private:
void baz () { int foo; }
};
int main ()
{
bar <int> ().qux ();
}
We first warn about the declaration in the template, and then again about the
instantiation.
