class A {}; class B { static A *A; }; A *B::A = 0; g++3.4-20040317 compiles code without errors. g++3.3 reports error: declaration of `A*B::A' changes meaning of `A' from `class A' which behavior is correct?Comment 1Gabriel Dos Reis 2004-03-21 15:13:16 UTC Subject: Re: New: declaration of `A*B::A' changes meaning of `A' from `class A'..."pluto at ds14 dot agh dot edu dot pl" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:| class A {}; | class B { | static A *A; | }; | A *B::A = 0; | | g++3.4-20040317 compiles code without errors. | g++3.3 reports error: declaration of `A*B::A' changes meaning of `A' from | `class A' | | which behavior is correct?The code is ill-formed. No diagnostic is required. GCC used todiagnose that in the past. This is a regression. I would think it isa serious one (a frequent mistake).-- GabyComment 2Wolfgang Bangerth 2004-03-24 23:23:37 UTC Hm, I may be blind today, but I fail to see what may be wrong with this code? (Clearly the initialization of the member has nothing to do with the problem here.) Gaby, do you refer to the "after declaration, reevaluate the declaration with the newly defined name and see whether it is still valid" rule? Or what do you refer to in saying that the code is invalid? W. Comment 3Gabriel Dos Reis 2004-03-25 00:22:28 UTC Subject: Re: [3.4/3.5 Regression] declaration of `A*B::A' changes meaning of `A' from `class A'..."bangerth at dealii dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:| Hm, I may be blind today, but I fail to see what may be wrong with this | code? (Clearly the initialization of the member has nothing to do with | the problem here.)Yes, I was not talking about the initialization.| Gaby, do you refer to the "after declaration, reevaluate | the declaration with the newly defined name and see whether it is still | valid" rule? Yes, that is the one I was referring to.-- Gaby Comment 4Wolfgang Bangerth 2004-03-25 04:47:52 UTC OK, this is most likely a regression with the new parser then. Thanks W. Comment 5Mark Mitchell 2004-05-24 02:47:22 UTC Working on a fix. Comment 9Mark Mitchell 2004-05-28 20:18:54 UTC Fixed in GCC 3.4.1. |