Mailing-List: contact dev-help@stdcxx.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <506387CA.7060307@hates.ms>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 18:55:06 -0400
From: Liviu Nicoara <nikkoara@hates.ms>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: Re: STDCXX-1070
References: <5062183F.8020209@hates.ms> <5062435A.7030903@gmail.com>
 <50624495.7050601@hates.ms>
In-Reply-To: <50624495.7050601@hates.ms>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 9/25/12 7:56 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
> On 9/25/12 7:50 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> On 09/25/2012 02:46 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
>>> I filed 1070, failure to build 22.locale.collate.cpp on Linux with gcc
>>> 4.7.1. Gcc, Comeau and Clang fail to compile it, Intel and Sun are fine.
>>> It looks to me like Intel and Sun compilers are not doing the right
>>> thing. A small test case and a patch have been attached. The failing
>>> code has been reduced to:
>>
>> I agree that the test case is ill-formed and requires a diagnostic.
>>
>> I haven't looked at the test so just to make sure the test case does
>> reflect the problem there: the well-formedness depends on whether
>> charT is a class type. If so, then the code would be okay because g()
>> would be found via associated namespace lookup. I.e., this would be
>> fine:
>
> Right. The test uses builtin types, therefore the argument-dependent lookup does
> not find g. The patch simply adds the declarations before the function that uses
> them.

Clear to go ahead here?

Thanks,
Liviu