Bug 143383

Summary: "error: too few template-parameter-lists" was shown.
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Reporter: L3support <linux-sid>
Component: gccAssignee: Jakub Jelinek <jakub>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 4.0   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2004-12-20 08:06:27 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description L3support 2004-12-20 07:59:23 UTC 
Description of problem:

When we run g++ for complie, 
"error: too few template-parameter-lists" was shown.
( our test program is as follows -- test001.cpp )

-----------------------------------------
<test001.cpp> 

#include <iostream>
#include <cstdio>

using namespace std;

template<class _T>
class foo
{
	static _T m_instance;
public:
	typedef _T member_type;
};

foo<int>::member_type foo<int>::m_instance;

int main()
{
	return 0;
}
-----------------------------------------

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
gcc-c++-3.4.1-10

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. # g++ test001.cpp
  
Actual results:

error: too few template-parameter-lists

Expected results:

(1) We run g++ properly.
(2) When is corrected g++ released ? (if g++ is bug)

Additional info:

(1) When we run g++, 
    "error: too few template-parameter-lists" was not shown.
    ( g++ version: 3.2.x)

(2) The same problem is indicated.
    http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17446
Comment 1 Jakub Jelinek 2004-12-20 08:06:27 UTC 
The testcase is not valid, see the upstream bugzilla bug where it is resolved
as invalid.  g++ 3.4.x is more strict C++ than g++ 3.2.3 or 3.3.x has been.
Comment 2 Jakub Jelinek 2004-12-20 08:13:41 UTC 
*** Bug 143384 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***