rjmccall added a comment. But what we've just been talking about is not a validity rule, it's an overload-resolution rule. It's not *invalid* to use a device function as a template argument to a host function template (or to a class template, which of course is neither host nor device). All you need to do is to resolve otherwise-intractable overload ambiguities by matching with the host-ness of the current context, which there's probably already code to do for when an overload set is used as e.g. a function argument.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D56411/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D56411 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
