"Gabriel Dos Reis" <gdr@[...].net>  skrev i meddelandet
news:m3n0rlvxy0.fsf@[...]..
> 
>  Some days ago, someone was wondering on this list (sorry, I can't find
>  the message off hand) whether the following construct
> 
>     typedef reverse_iterator<T> reverse_iterator;
> 
>  were valid or not and reported that one of his compiler rejected it.

Yes, but

typedef std::reverse_iterator<T>  reverse_iterator;

is accepted.

>  His compiler was right; somewhere, the standard says
> 
>  3.3/4
>     Given a set of declarations in a single declarative region, each of
>     which specifies the same unqualified name,

Note: "unqualified name"

>       --- they shall all refer to the same entity, or all refer to
>           functions and function templates; or
> 
>       --- exactly one declaration shall declare a class name or
>           enumeration name that is not a typedef name and the other
>           declarations shall all refer to the same object or
>           enumerator, or all refer to functions and func-tion
>           templates; in this case the class name or enumeration name is
>           hidden (3.3.7). [Note: a namespace name or a class template
>           name must be unique in its declarative region (7.3.2, clause
>           14). ]
> 
>  Hope that helps,
> 
>  -- Gaby

Bo Persson
bop2@[...].com





_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost