https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #29 from waffl3x <waffl3x at protonmail dot com> --- https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2789.html My alteration to CWG2789 came up on reddit and I realized I should probably post about it here. Instead of: "if both are non-static member functions, they have the same types for their object parameters, and" We assumed it would be more correct for it to consider corresponding object parameters: "if both are non-static member functions, they have corresponding object parameters, and" Without this change in wording, the behavior of overload resolution is different for member function templates with constraints and member functions that are not templates with constraints. I felt that would be undesirable so I assumed that the second wording was closer to the intentions behind CWG2789. This is the behavior that's currently been implemented, are there any objections?
