Now that we're doing normal handling of qualified names in a template, we need to handle the case of an unresolved enumerator name.
Jakub, should this also go into 8.1? Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit f7dae5dc1933f836e47cafeab2ff2bd5d80e4eeb Author: Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> Date: Tue May 1 13:41:21 2018 -0400 PR c++/85587 - error with scoped enum in template. * semantics.c (finish_qualified_id_expr): Don't return an unqualified IDENTIFIER_NODE. diff --git a/gcc/cp/semantics.c b/gcc/cp/semantics.c index 8c893ed64b0..4568bb96f3b 100644 --- a/gcc/cp/semantics.c +++ b/gcc/cp/semantics.c @@ -2061,7 +2061,8 @@ finish_qualified_id_expr (tree qualifying_class, } /* No need to check access within an enum. */ - if (TREE_CODE (qualifying_class) == ENUMERAL_TYPE) + if (TREE_CODE (qualifying_class) == ENUMERAL_TYPE + && TREE_CODE (expr) != IDENTIFIER_NODE) return expr; /* Within the scope of a class, turn references to non-static diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/scoped_enum8.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/scoped_enum8.C new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..3bd66395787 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/scoped_enum8.C @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +// PR c++/85587 +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } + +template <int N> +struct S +{ + enum class T + { + E, F + }; + void foo (); +}; + +template <int N> +void S<N>::foo () +{ + decltype (T::F) t; +} + +void +bar () +{ + S<0> s; + s.foo (); +}