subject:"\[Bug c\+\+\/22136\] \[4.1 regression\] Rejects old\-style using declaration"

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-11-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-11 05:40 --- (In reply to comment #8) > For some reason we are calling cp_parser_pre_parsed_nested_name_specifier. Actually that is fine. Though we got the wrong answer already in there. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-11-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-11 05:35 --- For some reason we are calling cp_parser_pre_parsed_nested_name_specifier. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22136

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-11-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-11 05:22 --- parser->scope is wrong when we call make_id_declarator. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22136

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-11-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-11 04:30 --- The difference between having the use and the no use case is that we get a nondependent name for naming the struct B which is just wrong. Hmm, I think I found related rejects valid for before 4.1.0: struct B {

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-11-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-11 03:36 --- For some reason we get the record B and not just I::B which would be dependent. Looking more into it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22136

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-10-30 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-31 03:50 --- Leaving as P2; we should fix this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22136

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-10-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-12 00:17 --- Any news on this one? -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconf

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-08-02 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org

-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |nathan at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW

[Bug c++/22136] [4.1 regression] Rejects old-style using declaration

2005-07-16 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-16 21:12 --- Hmm, I almost think this was caused by: 2005-06-08 Nathan Sidwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR c++/19497 * cp-tree.def (USING_DECL): Update documentation. * cp-tree.h (DECL_DEPENDENT_P):