From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22797 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2003 19:01:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21032 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2003 19:00:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp4.Stanford.EDU) (171.67.16.29) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 2003 19:00:45 -0000 Received: (from root@localhost) by smtp4.Stanford.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9) id h5DJ0iMd016645 for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:00:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (jackfruit.Stanford.EDU [171.64.38.136]) by smtp4.Stanford.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5DJ0dMs016588; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:00:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5DJ0cR15667; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:00:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] always use demangled name to set scope References: <20030612231727.GA19870@nevyn.them.org> <20030613042214.GA24015@nevyn.them.org> <20030613043834.GA24239@nevyn.them.org> <20030613185612.GA17267@nevyn.them.org> From: David Carlton Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 19:01:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20030613185612.GA17267@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00473.txt.bz2 On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 14:56:12 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz said: >> > That's namespace deduction. Nested type deduction is a slightly >> > different story - the principle is the same but we already have all >> > the information we need. >> >> Not if the type is nested inside a namespace. If your code is full of > Violent agreement again. I'm using the words differently from you; I > was strictly speaking about > class C { > class D { > .. > }; > }; Ah, right. I sometimes forget that not everybody in the world thinks of namespaces as types. David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu