Mantis 2598 uses the following example: class C #(type TC = int); parameter type LTC = real; endclass Question: 1) Is "C::TC i;" legal? No -- the first paragraph of 8.24.1 is clear that "::" is not legal for a parameterized class in this context. 2) Is "super.TC or super.LTC" legal? No -- at this point the only legal "dotted name" with a type is the interface_name form defined for typedefs in 6.18. Note -- I would not object to allowing super.TYPE_NAME as a type reference in the context of a typedef. 3) is C#()::TC legal? Yes. In 8.24.1 we have: When referring to the default specialization as the prefix to the class resolution operator, the explicit default specialization form of #() shall be used. So C#()::TC refers to the type TC within the default specialization of C (i.e. int). I don't think we need to take any action here unless there are additional questions. Gord -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Vreugdenhil 503-685-0808 Model Technology (Mentor Graphics) gordonv@model.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Fri Apr 24 10:16:34 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 24 2009 - 10:16:43 PDT