Specialization - Major hole in the spec?

[Peter Alexander]

On 5/01/12 1:19 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> foo!int(0); // 1
>
> Matches both 1 and 2. 2 is strictly more specialized, therefore 2 is
> chosen. Mistake on your side.

It chooses 1 because I have specified T to be int so 2 can't possibly match.

---

As for all your other replies, thanks, it all makes more sense when you 
remove the idea that a template specialization is a specialization of 
another template.