http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55778
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-21
21:05:36 UTC ---
No. SFINAE only applies if there's a substitution error, which doesn't apply
here. The foo(Args...) overload is viable and deduction succeeds unless the
argument types are not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55778
--- Comment #4 from ph dunski 2012-12-21 19:57:05 UTC
---
It is what i did ;)
But, i'm really not convicted, because, in my head, we should have a SFINAE
behaviour which should fall back into the good overloaded version until there
are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55778
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55778
--- Comment #2 from ph dunski 2012-12-21 19:17:05 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Am i wrong ?
>
> Yes. The foo(std::string const&, Args...) overload is not in scope within
> foo(int, Args...) so the ca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55778
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-21
18:37:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Am i wrong ?
Yes. The foo(std::string const&, Args...) overload is not in scope within
foo(int, Args...) so the call resolves to the foo(Args...
