https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45225
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
--- Comment #1 from boostcpp at gmail dot com 2010-08-07 12:18 ---
I also noticed gcc accept this code.
Should I create separate bug report?
template typename ... Types
class Foo { };
// Params is template parameter.
template typename ... Types, typename Params
class Foo typename
--- Comment #2 from boostcpp at gmail dot com 2010-08-07 12:18 ---
My bad. Never mind.
(In reply to comment #1)
I also noticed gcc accept this code.
Should I create separate bug report?
template typename ... Types
class Foo { };
// Params is template parameter.
template
--- Comment #3 from boostcpp at gmail dot com 2010-08-07 12:25 ---
Come to think of it, It just use primary template.
If I don't write the difinition of primary template, gcc issues error.
template typename ... Types
class Foo ;
But still, I think this template keyword usage in
--- Comment #4 from boostcpp at gmail dot com 2010-08-07 14:17 ---
It doesn't compile the following code which I think well-formed.
#include tuple
template typename ... Types
class Foo ;
template
template typename ... class ... Types,
typename ... Params
class Foo
