2011/9/23 Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>:
> On 09/22/2011 05:11 PM, Fabien Chêne wrote:
>>
>> 2011/9/22 Jason Merrill<ja...@redhat.com>:
>
>>> I don't, it just seemed strange to handle functions differently from
>>> other
>>> decls here.  But when I look more closely I see that we're in
>>> lookup_field_1, which isn't interested in functions, so I guess we do
>>> want
>>> to ignore function using-declarations here.
>>
>> That's strange because if we do return FUNCTION_DECL, PR c++/30195 seems
>> solved.
>
> It works for that testcase, but we need to handle functions in
> lookup_fnfields_1 since it's also called from other places.

It tried to add the target declaration of a USING_DECL in the
method_vec of the class where the USING_DECL is declared. Thus, I
copied the target decl, adjusted its access, and then called
add_method with the target decl. Unfortunaltely, it ends up with an
undefined reference...

struct Base {
  protected:
  void *Return () { return this; }
};

struct Derived : Base {
  using Base::Return;
};

int main ()
{
  Derived d;
  d.Return();
}

In the above example, it behaves as if Derived::Return (introduced via
using Base::Return) were not tied to the definition. I do not know
where I can fix it, any clues ?

Thanks,

-- 
Fabien

Reply via email to