Re: [gtkmm] GCC 3.1 warning suppression patch

On 28 Jun 2002, Murray Cumming wrote:

> Applied. But couldn't those typename declarations go in the base class?
> It does make the base class look a little useless.

the base class already has these, but GCC 3.1 complains about an 'implicit
typename' when using a typedef from a templated base class

   .--= ULLA! =---------------------.   `We are not here to give users what
   \     \   they want'  -- RMS, at GUADEC 2001
    `---= cactus cactus rulez org =---'
Cigány triatlon: leszalad a strandra, úszik egyet, és hazabiciklizik.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]