https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87841
--- Comment #5 from Ole Kniemeyer <o_kniemeyer at maxon dot net> --- Thanks for asking the committee. I think the standard makes sense as it is, because otherwise there is no chance to name the template parameter (that's what I need in my specific situation where I found the bug). Also the standard is what I would expect as the template parameter is "closer" to the function template as a member type of the enclosing class.
