http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37522
--- Comment #12 from ph dunski 2013-01-19 11:47:08 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Don't open an new bug, don't reopen this bug. I assume you are using
> none-trunk version of mingw-w64, are you? If so, please switch to
> trunk-ve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37522
ph dunski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||koala01 at free dot fr
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55778
--- Comment #4 from ph dunski 2012-12-21 19:57:05 UTC
---
It is what i did ;)
But, i'm really not convicted, because, in my head, we should have a SFINAE
behaviour which should fall back into the good overloaded version until there
are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55778
--- Comment #2 from ph dunski 2012-12-21 19:17:05 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Am i wrong ?
>
> Yes. The foo(std::string const&, Args...) overload is not in scope within
> foo(int, Args...) so the ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55778
Bug #: 55778
Summary: Variadic template extension possibly wrong
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
