16-07-2008, 03:59 PM
I agree. The example should probably be changed to:
and for simplicity even:
'A' and 'A' match the current specialization.
The rule text (or at least rationale) should be updated to highlight that this is required.
Regards,
Richard
Code:
typename A::B::TYPE t2 = 0; // Compliant - explicit use of B and of TYPE.and for simplicity even:
Code:
typename A::B::TYPE t2 = 0; // Compliant - explicit use of B and of TYPE.'A' and 'A' match the current specialization.
The rule text (or at least rationale) should be updated to highlight that this is required.
Regards,
Richard
<r>-- <br/>
Richard Corden<br/>
Programming Research Ltd.<br/>
<EMAIL email="[email protected]">[email protected]</EMAIL><br/>
+ 44 845 0048478</r>
Richard Corden<br/>
Programming Research Ltd.<br/>
<EMAIL email="[email protected]">[email protected]</EMAIL><br/>
+ 44 845 0048478</r>