https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68948
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Timo Reimann from comment #8)
> Author of the original failing code here. I'm not too deep into the standard
> to be able to make a judgement on whether this should be legal code or not.
> (FWIW though, it compiles fine in Clang.) If the extra namespace qualifier
> leads to method calls getting dropped silently, however, gcc should emit a
> compile error from my perspective. This would also be consistent with
> non-template code variations of the problem at hand.
>
>
Section 3.4.3.1 of the standard says:
In a lookup in which function names are not ignored and the
nested-name-specifier nominates a class C: — if the name specified after the
nested-name-specifier, when looked up in C, is the injected-class-name of C
(Clause 9), the name is instead considered to name the constructor of class C.
Such a constructor name shall be used only in the declarator-id of a
declaration that names a constructor or in a using-declaration.
I think the last line in particular means that the code is not legal.
