On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 09:45:54PM -0500, Andrew Hudson wrote: > > I gave it a good stare and it looked OK. It would have been a compile error > if there were no matching constructor, right? > > I started with gcc2 and switched to gcc4 because of this issue :-) Are you sure you've (re)compiled everything with gcc4? They have different name-mangling, which causes just that sort of problem... -- Pete --