C++ Primer (5th ed.) : Is “16.3 Overloading and Templates” wrong in all its “more specialized” examples?

Question

Section 16.3 of C++ Primer (5th edition) - Overloading and Templates -, teaches the function matching procedure in the presence of candidate function template(s) instantiati

Answer 1

You're given these declarations:

using std::string;
template  string debug_rep(const T &); /* 1 */
template  string debug_rep(T *);       /* 2 */

---

In the invocation

string s("SO");
debug_rep(&s);

the &s produces a string*, which can only match the T const& of (1) when T is string*. For the T* in (2), there is a match for T bound to string. So, provided your quoting is correct, the book is wrong about

debug_rep(const string *&)

being a possible instantiation: there is no such.

The instantiation resulting from T = string* would instead be

debug_rep( string* const& )

But which instantiation will be called?

As a general rule the simplest match is superior, but I never manage to remember the exact rules, so, I ask Visual C++ (because its typeid(T).name() produces readable type names by default):

#include 
#include 
#include 
using namespace std;

template< class T >
struct Type {};

template  auto debug_rep( T const& )   // 1
    -> string
{ return string() + "1 --> T = " + typeid(Type).name(); }

template  auto debug_rep( T* )         // 2
    -> string
{ return string() + "2 --> T = " + typeid(Type).name(); }

auto main() -> int
{
    string s( "SO" );
    cout << debug_rep( &s ) << endl;
    cout << "The type 'int const' is shown as " << typeid(Type).name() << endl;
}

And it says:

2 --> T = struct Type,class std::allocator > >
The type 'int const' is shown as struct Type

And so on for your second and third examples: apparently the author got some mixup regarding const.