From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 429 invoked by alias); 21 Oct 2002 19:46:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 413 invoked by uid 71); 21 Oct 2002 19:46:02 -0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 12:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021021194602.412.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: paolo@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Joe Buck Subject: Re: c++/8279: REGRESSION: failure to find a matching function in Reply-To: Joe Buck X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00786.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/8279; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Joe Buck To: pcarlini@unitus.it (Paolo Carlini) Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, paolo@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/8279: REGRESSION: failure to find a matching function in Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 12:37:49 -0700 (PDT) Paolo writes: > I'm tempted to agree with Wolfgang... While I still want to see the input from the comp.std.c++ folks, I've reduced the priority of this PR to non-critical/medium, since it's arguable that this not be considered a regression (even though the program worked in 2.95.x) due to the honor-std issues, and because there is a workaround. Even if gcc's behavior is correct, the diagnostic is puzzling: PREFIX/include/c++/3.2.1/bits/stream_iterator.h:141: no match for `std::basic_ostream >& << const std::pair&' operator when there is what appears to be an exact match. Strategies to come up with a better diagnostic (e.g. tell the user why the function s/he intended to use isn't accepted) would be wlcome.