Initial checkin of GCC 4.9.0 from trunk (r208799).

Change-Id: I48a3c08bb98542aa215912a75f03c0890e497dba

1 files changed, 45 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gcc-4.9/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/dependent-name5.C b/gcc-4.9/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/dependent-name5.C
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..681060c70
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc-4.9/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/dependent-name5.C
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+// PR c++/9634, c++/29469, c++/29607
+// Contributed by: Giovanni Bajo <giovannibajo at gcc dot gnu dot org>
+// DR224: Make sure that a name is *truly* semantically dependent.
+
+struct D {
+  typedef int K;
+};
+
+template <typename T>
+struct A
+{
+  typedef int Bar;
+
+  template <typename>
+  struct N {};
+
+  typedef Bar          type1;
+  typedef A::Bar       type2;
+  typedef A<T>::Bar    type3;
+  typedef A<T*>::Bar    type4;  // { dg-error "" }
+  typedef typename A<T*>::Bar type5;
+
+  typedef N<int>       type6;
+  typedef A::N<int>    type7;
+  typedef A<T>::N<int> type8;
+  typedef A<T*>::template N<int> type9;  // { dg-error "" }
+  typedef typename A<T*>::template N<int> type10;
+
+  typedef D Bar2;
+  struct N2 { typedef int K; };
+
+  // Check that A::N2 is still considered dependent (because it
+  //  could be specialized), while A::Bar2 (being just ::D) is not.
+  typedef A::Bar2 type11;
+  typedef type11::K k3;
+
+  typedef A::N2 type12;
+  typedef typename type12::K k2;
+  typedef type12::K k1;  // { dg-error "" }
+
+  // Check that A::Bar2 is not considered dependent even if we use
+  // the typename keyword.
+  typedef typename A::Bar2 type13;
+  typedef type13::K k4;
+};