http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51664
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51664
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-23
14:41:17 UTC ---
Richard: yes.
[temp.names] p3 says
-3- After name lookup (3.4) finds that a name is a template-name or that an
operator-function-id or a literal-operator-id refers to a set of overl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51664
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51664
--- Comment #3 from Timon Gehr 2011-12-23 14:02:49
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I don't think it's valid, Clang and EDG reject it too
DMC accepts it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51664
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-12-23
13:47:04 UTC ---
wasn't the template keyword meant to avoid this ambiguity? Thus, if x.foo
is a template then you are required to write x.template foo because x is
template dependent?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51664
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-23
13:41:04 UTC ---
I don't think it's valid, Clang and EDG reject it too
