http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54161
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> 2012-08-02 20:13:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Jason can you double check whether we > want to reject even without -pedantic? I hope it will be active even without -pedantic > Anyway, Daniel, it would be nice if you could add also SFINAE testcase too, > because likely it's a different issue:[..] Yes, you are right, I was generalizing too early here. The actual test case was this one: template<class T, class = decltype(sizeof(T))> auto f(int) -> char; template<class> auto f(...) -> char(&)[2]; static_assert(sizeof(f<void>(0)) != 1, ""); // OK - Oops static_assert(sizeof(f<void()>(0)) != 1, ""); // OK - Oops but Jason reported on the core reflector that this is already a very special situation that the core language needs to handle first. So lets take the SFINAE rumors away from this report.
