--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-28 17:07 ---
No, bug 99 has specialization too:
template
double ch(dummy, dummy);
template
double ch(dummy, dummy<0>);
template
double ch(dummy<0>, dummy);
Those are all specialization of the first one, not overlo
--- Comment #6 from d dot frey at gmx dot de 2008-02-28 08:14 ---
I looked at bug #99, but I am unsure whether this bug is really a dup of it.
#99 is about overloads and occurs with user types, while this bug is about
partial template specializations and occurs only with certain types fr
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-27 22:45 ---
This is most likely a dup of bug 99.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35387
--- Comment #4 from d dot frey at gmx dot de 2008-02-27 21:58 ---
More information:
I checked out the trunk and checked it again. The bug is still present, but
while testing it, I noticed that the problem does not occur with my own types,
only with types from the standard library. Here'
--- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-27 13:00 ---
Confirmed. This is a diagnostics bug. (And perhaps a duplicate).
Thanks for the report. If you would like to contribute a patch, please read
http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org change
--- Comment #2 from d dot frey at gmx dot de 2008-02-27 12:02 ---
I understand where the names come from, but that doesn't make the message
correct. Consider the specialization in the example program to use <_T2,_T1>
(note the reversed order) and an instantiation with , the resulting
mes
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-27 09:35 ---
It uses the names as in the std::pair template declaration, so you could argue
this is correct.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35387
