https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102044
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill <ja...@gcc.gnu.org>: https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a commit r12-4453-g79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a Author: Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> Date: Tue Sep 28 10:02:04 2021 -0400 c++: array cv-quals and template specialization [PR101402] PRs 101402, 102033, etc. demonstrated that the fix for PR92010 wasn't handling all cases of the CWG1001/1322 issue with parameter type qual stripping and arrays with templates. The problem turned out to be in determine_specialization, which did an extra substitution without the 92010 fix and then complained that the result didn't match. But just removing that wrong/redundant code meant that we were accepting specializations with different numbers of parameters, because the code in fn_type_unification that compares types in this case wasn't checking for length mismatch. After fixing that, I realized that fn_type_unification couldn't tell the difference between variadic and non-variadic function types, because the args array doesn't include the terminal void we use to indicate non-variadic function type. So I added it, and made the necessary adjustments. Thanks to qingzhe "nick" huang <nickhuan...@hotmail.com> for the patch that led me to dig more into this, and the extensive testcases. PR c++/51851 PR c++/101402 PR c++/102033 PR c++/102034 PR c++/102039 PR c++/102044 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * pt.c (determine_specialization): Remove redundant code. (fn_type_unification): Check for mismatched length. (type_unification_real): Ignore terminal void. (get_bindings): Don't stop at void_list_node. * class.c (resolve_address_of_overloaded_function): Likewise. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/template/fnspec2.C: New test. * g++.dg/template/parm-cv1.C: New test. * g++.dg/template/parm-cv2.C: New test. * g++.dg/template/parm-cv3.C: New test.
