https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87464
Alex <alexejfink at gmx dot net> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |---
--- Comment #3 from Alex <alexejfink at gmx dot net> ---
Hello,
I am sorry for the confusion. With "works" I did not mention the clang & VC
compile the example -- of course the lines commended as "expected error" do not
compile and shall not compile.
The issue here is not "not compiling", but the wrong/misleading error reporting
of GCC, especially compared to those of clang & VC. GCC reports a substitution
failure at line 27 & 36 as hard error, what according to the SFINAE concept is
not.
The extra hard error report at those lines is misleading and could direct a c++
newbie into wrong direction: to repair this issue by "fixing" the enable_if
guards.
The clang and VC report a "note" for those lines, which is the better way,
IMHO.
best regards,
Alex
