[Bug c++/99399] why does not a pack expansion that is a using-delcaration which intends to introduce the base classes's constructor accept by GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #5 from Andrew
[Bug c++/99399] why does not a pack expansion that is a using-delcaration which intends to introduce the base classes's constructor accept by GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0
[Bug c++/99399] why does not a pack expansion that is a using-delcaration which intends to introduce the base classes's constructor accept by GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---
[Bug c++/99399] why does not a pack expansion that is a using-delcaration which intends to introduce the base classes's constructor accept by GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Keywords|needs-bisection
[Bug c++/99399] why does not a pack expansion that is a using-delcaration which intends to introduce the base classes's constructor accept by GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Seems fixed in GCC 11+.
[Bug c++/99399] why does not a pack expansion that is a using-delcaration which intends to introduce the base classes's constructor accept by GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99399 --- Comment #1 from jim x --- All the quotes refer to n4861.