https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89741
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- There are indeed no explicit specializations (nor partial specializations) but IMHO the above mentioned sentence talks about all specializations, including the implicit specializations. Just read the two sentences before that, those say: "Knowing which names are type names allows the syntax of every template definition to be checked. No diagnostic shall be issued for a template definition for which a valid specialization can be generated." The example at the end of that paragraph also shows a couple of cases when issues in a template may be diagnosed even when it is not instantiated and when the diagnostics must be deferred until instantiation.