------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-05-31 13:49 ------- The PR Andrew cites is essentially a duplicate of PR 8271, which has been around for 2 1/2 years already. It is about the fact that gcc accepts a pointer to a constant member function for an argument that does not have the const specifier. However, up to now this didn't lead to an ambiguity: somehow gcc "knew" that the declaration with the 'const' specifier was a better match, but this was lost recently, as it appears. W.
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21799
