On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 05:34:30PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >> I'm having a problem with GCC 2.95.3 that appears to be a compiler
> >> bug.
The handling of overloads with respect to const and non-const modifiers
on pointers was badly broken in gcc 2.95.3. That compiler accepted
so much crud that if you learned C++ by writing code that it would
accept, you haven't learned C++.
(It did OK with correct C++ that was within its limitations, for the most
part, the problem was with all the things it accepted that it should have
rejected).
Your options are to fix your code (so that you always give any non-const
references an exactly matching type), "fix" the compiler yourself ("fix"
is in quotes since you want the compiler to accept non-standard code and
interpret it in a non-standard way), or hire someone to fix it for you.
