The following should compile according to this DR report (but it is only in ready state so I am going to
confirm it and then suspend it):
class a {};
typename ::a f();
Also the following should not compile as a is not qualified then:
class a {};
typename a f();

Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-23 04:27
Confirmed, to

Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-23 04:28
Suspend this as it only in the ready state.

Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-23 05:05
and I thought I saw a bug or two about this before.

Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-06-23 14:58
Subject: Re: New: [DR 382] qualified names should allow typename keyword in front of it (even in non-templates)

"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla (AT) gcc (DOT) gnu.orgwrites:

| The following should compile according to this DR report (but it is only in ready state so I am going to
| confirm it and then suspend it):
| class a {};
| typename ::a f();
|
| Also the following should not compile as a is not qualified then:
| class a {};
| typename a f();

If that is what the DR says, then the DR does not make any sense
-- Gaby

Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-23 15:04
(In reply to comment #4)
If that is what the DR says, then the DR does not make any sense
Hey I am just reading what it says:
<#382>.

DR 468 is about allowing ::template outside of templates.

I am not making this up.

Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-06-23 18:13
Subject: Re: [DR 382] qualified names should allow typename keyword in front of it (even in non-templates)

"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla (AT) gcc (DOT) gnu.orgwrites:

| Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-23 15:04
| (In reply to comment #4)
| If that is what the DR says, then the DR does not make any sense
| Hey I am just reading what it says:
| <#382>.
|
| DR 468 is about allowing ::template outside of templates.
|
| I am not making this up.

I'm not saying you're making it up. It just strikes me that the new
"subtlities" don't make much sense.
-- Gaby