http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
--- Comment #13 from Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-10 15:24:28 UTC --- > Should we change the expected demangling in 14.cc to > be void foo<int, void (double), int>() or should we do something else. I think 14.cc should be foo<int, void (double), int>(). Your change is ok with me. FWIW, this is also consistent to C++ hackers using C++0x's std::function notation. So, at least we are consistent with that (as well as g++ error messages as pointed out by Paolo.)
