------- Comment #16 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-21 19:00
-------
Shouldn't it get the same error as for this case?
template<class T>
T foo() { return T(); }
int main()
{
&foo;
}
That example can be made valid like so:
int (*pf)() = &foo;
Which demonstrates that the angle brackets are not necessary, *if* the compiler
can determine which specialisation is intended. So the "cannot resolve address
of overloaded function" error is arguably correct.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5458
