https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61182
--- Comment #10 from pdaou...@aldebaran-robotics.com ---
(In reply to Daniel Krügler from comment #9)
> I don' think that this specialization can - according to the language -
> remove const qualifiers of function types, because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61182
--- Comment #3 from pdaou...@aldebaran-robotics.com ---
I am no c++ expert but my guess is that it should be allowed to have qualified
function types as long as you don't try to instantiate that type.
The problem in our code is that we use
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pdaou...@aldebaran-robotics.com
Created attachment 32793
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32793&action=edit
Minimal test
The attached code does not compile on gcc 4.9 but compiles on clang 3.4 and gc
