[Bug c++/35106] Unconsistent handling of overloaded vs default arguments to functions

[vonbrand at inf dot utfsm dot cl]

------- Comment #4 from vonbrand at inf dot utfsm dot cl  2008-02-06 18:23 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> I still don't understand what you are asking?  Do you have an example of where
> the differences comes into play?  The only one I Know of is taking the address
> of the function, The default argument case cannot be assigned to a function
> pointer that takes less than the arguments (that means it needs to include the
> default arguments in the function pointer). 

Look at the attached testcase, there it does make a difference. This is
simplified from a compile failure (now with gcc-4.3, it worked fine with 4.1)
in Linley's Dungeon Crawl.

[Strange.. I did attach the testcase before, it doesn't wshow up now?]


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35106