shafik added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang/test/CXX/drs/dr23xx.cpp:202
+  // void g2(A a) { a.operator B decltype(B())::*(); }
+  // void h(A a) { a.operator identity<B>::type B::*(); }  
+  // void h2(A a) { a.operator B identity<B>::type::*(); } 
----------------
Endill wrote:
> shafik wrote:
> > While gcc accepts the first three it does not like the last two: 
> > https://godbolt.org/z/js8Pz14Eo
> > 
> > I believe they should also be covered but not confident.
> I agree they should. I can't find any special considerations in the standard 
> regarding unqualified name lookup of template arguments.
> 
> Are there any action items for me here?
Yeah, can you file a gcc bug report for the last two? If they agree it is a gcc 
but then we are all good, if not then we need to see what they say.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D142316/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D142316

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to