------- Comment #2 from matthijs at bomhoff dot nl 2007-08-10 13:58 ------- (In reply to comment #1) > I think this is really PR 11764.
It could have the same cause I guess. I figured it might not be the same, as foo<double> is not really identical to foo<int>. (Even though the names are the same, the template arguments differ so it could never denote a c'tor of the same type in this case. Besides, I think this code should actually be accepted, as it is, but lead to a different behaviour than it currently does...) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33041
