[Bug c++/33287] namespace hides class definition

2007-12-26 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-26 19:40 --- To sum things up: * The code is invalid, i.e. it shouldn't compile. * GCC up to 4.2.x rejected the code for the wrong reason: bug.cc:24: error: 'C1' does not name a type This message is way too late.

[Bug c++/33287] namespace hides class definition

2007-09-03 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-03 18:05 --- Yes and this correct. Though the error was wrong. On the trunk we get: t.cc:12: error: 'namespace C1 { }' redeclared as different kind of symbol t.cc:2: error: previous declaration of 'class C1' --

[Bug c++/33287] namespace hides class definition

2007-09-03 Thread fang at csl dot cornell dot edu
--- Comment #2 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2007-09-03 18:11 --- Subject: Re: namespace hides class definition --- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-03 18:05 --- Yes and this correct. Though the error was wrong. On the trunk we get:

[Bug c++/33287] namespace hides class definition

2007-09-03 Thread ilgb at livius dot net
--- Comment #3 from ilgb at livius dot net 2007-09-03 18:15 --- it looks we are talking about different bugs, the error I get is different: ../src/a.cpp:26: error: 'C1' does not name a type where the line 26 is the following: C1 c; --

[Bug c++/33287] namespace hides class definition

2007-09-03 Thread fang at csl dot cornell dot edu
--- Comment #4 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2007-09-03 18:19 --- Subject: Re: namespace hides class definition --- Comment #3 from ilgb at livius dot net 2007-09-03 18:15 --- it looks we are talking about different bugs, the error I get is different:

[Bug c++/33287] namespace hides class definition

2007-09-03 Thread eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com
--- Comment #5 from eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com 2007-09-04 04:02 --- (In reply to comment #1) Yes and this correct. Andrew, Are you saying that this bug is invalid? If so, then it needs to be closed as such. Thanks -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33287