And another follow-up.
> Isn’t it template-parameter-list that is different rather than
> parameter-type-list?
>
> http://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.fct#def:parameter-type-list
> http://eel.is/c++draft/temp#nt:template-parameter-list
Yes. The pieces are these:
template
// template-p
>> The rule for determining when a base class function declaration
>> introduced by a using-declaration is hidden by a derived class
>> function declaration does not take the template parameter list
>> into account:
>> http://eel.is/c++draft/namespace.udecl#15.sentence-1
>
> Huh? This
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> And answers are trickling in; see thread starting with
>>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-users/2018-November/001417.html
>
> And here's the definite answer from a clang developer:
>
> The rule for determining when a base class function declaration
> introd
> And answers are trickling in; see thread starting with
>
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-users/2018-November/001417.html
And here's the definite answer from a clang developer:
The rule for determining when a base class function declaration
introduced by a using-declaration is hid
