On 09/30/2015 02:16 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 09/30/2015 01:31 PM, John McCall wrote:
On Sep 29, 2015, at 8:42 PM, Jason Merrill <[email protected]> wrote:
There's also the question of whether the non-transaction-safe
function type is substitutable in this mangling. I think we might as
well allow it, as we do for cv-qualified types.
Hmm. To me, this seems much more like a ref-qualifier or a cv method
qualifier, which we do not make independently substitutable.
It's like them in that it comes at the end of the declarator, but it is
unlike them in that they modify the 'this' parameter.
It's like cv-quals in that there is a standard conversion to change the
qualifier under a pointer.
On the other hand, trying to treat it differently from function cv-quals
when they appear in the same place seems like a hassle, so I think I'm
coming around to your perspective.
Jason
_______________________________________________
cxx-abi-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://sourcerytools.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cxx-abi-dev
