Re: [gtkmm] GCC 3.1 warning suppression patch

[Murray Cumming <murrayc usa net>]

On Fri, 2002-06-28 at 12:31, ERDI Gergo wrote:
> 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

No, there's no "typename" in the base class, just "typedef". Could you
try "typedef typename" or whatever in the base class instead?

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc usa net
www.murrayc.com