https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71968
--- Comment #2 from Hubert Tong <hstong at ca dot ibm.com> --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1) > clang mangles differently and therefore avoids the issue: > > markus@x4 /tmp % clang++ -c b.cc && nm -C b.o > U abort > 0000000000000000 T bar() > 0000000000000000 W void foo<int>(char (*) [2]) > 0000000000000000 V void foo<int>(char (*) [2])::cnt Clang worked by accident; slightly different version reported: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
