2014-11-03 21:18 GMT+01:00 Fabien Chêne <fabien.ch...@gmail.com>: > 2014-10-09 15:34 GMT+02:00 Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>: > [...] >>> If the USING_DECL is returned, the code below will be rejected as >>> expected, but the error message will not mention the line where the >>> USING_DECL appears as the previous definition, but at the target >>> declaration of the USING_DECL instead. >> >> >> I think that's what happens if you strip the USING_DECL and return what it >> points to; if you return the USING_DECL itself that shouldn't happen (though >> then the caller needs to be able to deal with getting a USING_DECL). > > [Sorry for the delay] Humm, l_a_c_t returns a TYPE upon success, shall > I change it and return a DECL instead ?
Ping. Before I made the change, I'd like to be sure this is what you have in mind. And sorry, my time is very limited at the moment... -- Fabien
