From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30990 invoked by alias); 26 Feb 2003 17:52:32 -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 30965 invoked by uid 48); 26 Feb 2003 17:52:32 -0000 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 17:52:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030226175232.30964.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: dbeck@beckground.hu, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org From: bangerth@dealii.org Reply-To: bangerth@dealii.org, dbeck@beckground.hu, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/9865: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression] Template matching for reference types X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg01385.txt.bz2 List-Id: Old Synopsis: traits for const types have bad results New Synopsis: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression] Template matching for reference types State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: bangerth State-Changed-When: Wed Feb 26 17:52:32 2003 State-Changed-Why: Confirmed. A shorter testcase is this: ---------------------------- template struct is_const { static const bool value = false; }; template struct is_const { }; int main() { is_const::value; } ------------------------- I don't think it should fail to compile, but it does since 3.2, the reason being that gcc decides to look into the const specialization of the template. W. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=9865