value vs. const ref, char* vs char[4] - part 2

Is the following appropriate behavior?  It certainly isn't what I
expected.


#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

template<typename T> bool fun(const T& value) {
    cout << "In fun(const T&);" << endl;

}

template<typename T> bool fun(T value) {
    cout << "In fun(T);" << endl;

}

int main(int argc, char** argv) {
    fun(static_cast<const int&>(10) );

}

$ CC test.C
"test.C", line 14: Error: Overloading ambiguity between
"fun<int>(const int&)" and "fun<int>(int)".
1 Error(s) detected.
$
$
$ g++ test.C
test.C: In function `int main(int, char**)':
test.C:14: error: call of overloaded `fun(const int&)' is ambiguous
test.C:5: note: candidates are: bool fun(const T&) [with T = int]
test.C:9: note:                 bool fun(T) [with T = int]
$

I would have said that if I tell the compiler explicitly that I want a
const int&, there is no ambiguity.  Something in the C++ standard
apparently says that this is correct behavior, but it seems wrong to
me.

                    Regards,

                    Abraham