http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59056
--- Comment #5 from Richard Smith ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> I thought if the partial specializations were ambiguous then these function
> overloads should be too.
Yes, this inconsistency is very surprising. GCC, EDG, and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59056
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard-gccbugzilla@metafoo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59056
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Similar (but not identical) to PR 58752
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59056
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I must be misunderstanding something, because rewriting the class template
partial specializations as function templates (as per [temp.class.order]) shows
that one is more specialized than the other, as the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59056
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini ---
Needs an analysis, but I doubt this is a bug, all the up to date compilers I
have handy (eg, clang, icc) reject it the same way.
