------- Comment #15 from joseph dot h dot garvin at gmail dot com 2010-01-21
18:38 -------
I'm not sure what the standard says, but conceptually, if you only provide a
template generic template foo, with no non-templated foo defined, then
instantiations of foo are *never* 'overloaded.' If I have:
template<int n>
void foo() {}
Then foo<3> is a distinct function from foo<2>. It doesn't make sense to refer
to foo as overloaded (unless there is also a non-templated foo defined). foo<3>
has a single unique address, there is no ambiguity. Automatically considering
it an overloaded function (as I suspect GCC must be doing internally) leads to
a confusing error when compiling this snippet:
#include <iostream>
template<int n>
void foo() {}
int main()
{
&foo;
}
You get the same error about not being able to resolve foo because it's
overloaded. But foo isn't a function at this point. It's a template. And no
template parameters have been filled in. I should get an error about expecting
angle brackets.
--
joseph dot h dot garvin at gmail dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |joseph dot h dot garvin at
| |gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5458
