http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57403
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Nick Maclaren from comment #2)
> That may well be true, but I can't find any such restriction in the C++
> standard. It would be a great help if the library specification weren't
> so ambiguous - in this case, it hinges around the meaning of the word
> 'type', and the unqualified word is used with at least three meanings
> in the standard.
C++03 gives the prototype of the constructor:
explicit vector(size_type n, const T& value = T(), const Allocator& =
Allocator());
which shows that it can't work:
typedef volatile int T;
void f () { T const& a = T(); }
For C++11, the prototype changed, it gets harder to follow...
