https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24264
Anders Granlund <anders.granlun...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #12 from Anders Granlund <anders.granlun...@gmail.com> ---
Ok, you are right about this bug being invalid.
I got the answer on stack overflow now:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31702956/interpretation-of-basic-scope-hidingp2-when-unqualified-name-lookup-involves-u
Turned out that there are other rules preventing making my interpretation. This
is the reason I don't like "as if" rules. It is not always clear how far you
can go in applying them. You apply them, and then after a while you see some
other rules that prevent that application.
Also I think the section [basic.lookup.unqual] could include a reformulation of
[basic.scope.hiding]p1 http://eel.is/c++draft/basic.scope.hiding#1 as one of
the rules.
Bug 24272 seems still be a bug at least.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
LLVMbugs mailing list
LLVMbugs@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmbugs
