https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102156
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed|0 |1 Summary|`cannot call constructor` |[9/10/11/12 Regression] |error during member access |`cannot call constructor` | |error during member access Target Milestone|--- |9.5 Known to work| |4.4.7 Last reconfirmed| |2021-09-01 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill | |a/show_bug.cgi?id=11764 Keywords| |rejects-valid Known to fail| |4.5.4 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > There was an C++ old defect report about B::B being the name of the > constructor or the class name. But it looks like it is GCC getting confused because of that defect report (PR11764). And here is a testcase which makes this a regression from GCC 4.4.0 (valid C++98) struct C{int tt;}; template<class T > struct B :T { int t;}; struct A :B<C> { }; int main() { A t; return t.B<C>::B<C>::tt; }