Talk:Substitution failure is not an error

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 July 2022. The result of the discussion was keep.

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

C/C++ Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject C/C++, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of C and C++ topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.C/C++Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++Template:WikiProject C/C++C/C++ articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Compiler Example error

The 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Variables "yes" and "no" are guaranteed to have different sizes

I 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)[reply]