https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> This is probably another dup of PR 41437
Apparently not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2019-06-19 00:00:00 |2020-3-12
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Right. Just because all your code examples use "template" and "private" doesn't
make them related.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to zhonghao from comment #2)
> A related code sample:
> gcc also accepts it, although x->value is private.
No that is not related at all. In fact it is only rejected when D::verify
is instantiated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925
--- Comment #2 from zhonghao at pku dot org.cn ---
A related code sample:
class A
{
virtual int String ();
};
class F: public A { };
template < typename V > class G
{
private: V value;
};
class D
{
template < int N > void Verify() {
G* x =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90925
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
