|
Hi all,
I'm in doubt with the following code:
class Base {
public:
class Nested {};
};
class Derived:public Base {
public:
class Nested {
public:
void m();
};
class AnotherNested {
friend class Nested; // gcc 4.0.2 takes it as 'Base::Nested'
//friend class Derived::Nested; // this is needed in order to
be compiled by gcc 4.0.2
#line 14
AnotherNested() {}
};
};
void Derived::Nested::m() {
#line 18
Derived::AnotherNested instance;
}
should the first friend decl refer to Base::Nested or Derived::Nested?
The code is refused e.g. by gcc 4.0(.0,.2):
a.cpp: In member function 'void Derived::Nested::m()':
a.cpp:14: error: 'Derived::AnotherNested::AnotherNested()' is private
a.cpp:18: error: within this context
because gcc 4 takes for granted the friend refers to Base::Nested.
However, e.g. gcc 3.4 takes it as Derived::Nested.
Declaring the friend the second way:
friend class Derived::Nested;
works in gcc 4.0, but I see two issues with it:
1) it uses not-yet-fully-declared class Derived
2) some compilers (e.g. VC 6.0) can't compile it (because of the
Derived incompletness)
I've not succeeded tracking this issue neither in the C++ standard nor
in gcc.
best regards
Tomas Sieger
| 
