Re: [boost] is_base_and_derived instantiated from within derived classdefinition

From: Gennaro Prota (gennaro_prota_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-11 15:52:57

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 13:17:00 +0100, "John Maddock"
<john_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>Zak Kipling wrote:
>>> From discussion on the above bug page, it appears unclear whether
>>> this
>> or not this code is actually legal... has the patch broken something
>> which should be expected to work, or are the existing versions of gcc
>> and Comeau accepting illegal code?
>
>It looks borderline to me: I suspect that gcc is correct in complaining 
>about this, of course that doesn't mean it *has* to diagnose this as an 
>error, simply that it is probably permitted to do so.

But why? I can't see anything in the standard supporting this point of
view. To Zak: what's the point of having the class Z in your example?

--
[ Gennaro Prota. C++ developer, Library designer. ]
[    For Hire    http://gennaro-prota.50webs.com/ ]