Talk:Substitution failure is not an error
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Srrrgei in topic Variables "yes" and "no" are guaranteed to have different sizes
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 July 2022. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Compiler Example error
editThe example appears to be incorrect. With "g++ (GCC) 4.2.2" function "#2" is called both times.
- Sounds like an error in your compiler. If you want, you can post your complete code here or on my talk page, and I'll take a look at it. decltype (talk) 06:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- No he is correct. The second example is in error. The first prototype takes a pointer. Neither call uses a pointer argument. Thus, both call the (...) version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.172.42 (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
- That comment was made back in 2009, at which time the article looked like this. There are no pointers or ellipses in that example.
decltype(talk) 09:21, 13 January 2011 (UTC) - And the second example also seems correct from what I can tell. test<T>(0) with T=foo matches yes& test<foo>(foo::type*). 0 is convertible to pointer-to-float.
decltype(talk) 09:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
- That comment was made back in 2009, at which time the article looked like this. There are no pointers or ellipses in that example.
- No he is correct. The second example is in error. The first prototype takes a pointer. Neither call uses a pointer argument. Thus, both call the (...) version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.172.42 (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Variables "yes" and "no" are guaranteed to have different sizes
editI think that should be Types "yes" and "no" are guaranteed to have different sizes, shouldn't it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srrrgei (talk • contribs) 13:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)