c++11 - Trouble understanding C++ dependent types, vs what's on the current instantiation

The code below is adapted from the answer here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/17579889/352552

My purpose in asking this question is try to to understand better how C++ handles type resolution around dependent types, versus what's considered to be on the current instantiation, and therefore not needing a typename qualifier. I've been getting contradictory results from different compilers, so I've come here looking for a more canonical answer.

Consider this code

#include 

struct B {
  typedef int result_type;
};


template
struct C {
};

template<>
struct C {
  typedef float result_type;
}; 

template

struct D : B, C {
  std::string show() {
    //A) Default to current instantiation - ignore dependent type, even if one exists, or so I hope
    D::result_type r1;

    //B) What **exactly** does typename add, here?
    //typename D::result_type r1;

    return whichType(r1);
  }


  std::string whichType (int val){
    return "INT";
  }
  std::string whichType (float val){
    return "FLOAT";
  }    
};



int main() {  
  D stringD;
  D floatD;
  std::cout<<"String initialization "<  std::cout<<"Float initialization "<}

line A) in show(), if I understand correctly, tells the compiler to use the current instantiation, so I should get INT INT. On GCC, I do. So far, so good.

Line B, again if I understand correctly, should either tell the compiler to consider dependent types, which would make that line error out because of the ambiguity; or, if that means only consider dependent types, I should get INT FLOAT. On GCC I get INT INT there, too. Why?

---

Running this on Clang.

Line A doesn't compile at all.

error: no type named 'result_type' in 'D'; did you mean simply 'result_type'? D::result_type r1;

dropping the D:: does indeed yield INT INT.

Should it have compiled, or is Clang correct here?

Line B does indeed error on the ambiguity

error: member 'result_type' found in multiple base classes of different types typename D::result_type r1

---

Can anyone here say with authority which compiler (if any!) is canonically correct, and why?

Assuming Clang is correct, it might imply that

MyType::F

is invalid for referencing a type from the current instantiation if it exists on a base type; it's only valid if the type is defined on that class. Ie adding

typedef double dd;

to D

and then

D::dd d = 1.1;
std::cout<

in show would work just fine, which is indeed the case.

Moreover,

typename D::sometype

seems to mean consider dependent types, but not exclusively, and so expect errors if such a type winds up defined in multiple places, either in the current instantiation, and or dependent on a template parameter.

But again, this all assumes Clang's behavior is correct according to spec, which I can't speak to.

---

Link to GCC repl I was using:
https://wandbox.org/

Link to Clang repl I was using:
https://repl.it/languages/cpp11