http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24985
--- Comment #38 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-13
11:53:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #36)
> > > t.C:1:6: note: candidate expects 0 arguments, 1 provided
> > > void f(); void f(int,int);
> > > ^
> > > t.C:1:17: note: void f(int, int)
> > > void f(); void f(int,int);
> > > ^
> > >
> > > and the 2nd note here looks wrong.
> >
> > Could you explain why?
>
> Because void f(int, int) is not of type "candidate expects 0 arguments" but
> it is of expects two which is duplicate of the following
>
> t.C:1:17: note: candidate expects 2 arguments, 1 provided
> void f(); void f(int,int);
> ^
You're confusing two separate notes.
This bit refers to the first overload, which expects 0 args:
t.C:1:6: note: candidate expects 0 arguments, 1 provided
void f(); void f(int,int);
^
And this bit refers to the second overload:
t.C:1:17: note: void f(int, int)
void f(); void f(int,int);
^
The line following says "expects 2 arguments"
This is why in my previous comment I suggested removing the caret diagnostic
between the related notes, so the notes that refer to the same thing are
adjacent.
