Re: [gtkmm] GCC 3.1 warning suppression patch

[Murray Cumming <murrayc usa net>]

On Fri, 2002-06-28 at 13:13, ERDI Gergo wrote:
> On 28 Jun 2002, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > No, there's no "typename" in the base class, just "typedef". Could you
> > try "typedef typename" or whatever in the base class instead?
> 
> Umm, why would that work? There's no sense in
> 	typedef typename Foo Bar;
> (you can't throw random 'typename' keywords around for a solution:))

I think it might work if Foo is a template parameter. I could be wrong.

> Maybe you misunderstand the problem. The problem is having a bunch of
> typedefs in a base class, then using these from a derived class.

If we ignore the fact that they are templates, I don't see why there
should be a problem with that.

> This is
> what produces a warning. So you have to explicitly include these typedefs
> in the derived class as well. This is what my patch does.

Did you try it?

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