On 2013-07-08 04:10, Manu wrote:
Hmmm, this is an interesting point.
I initially thought this was desirable, it could be useful.
But now that you point it out, I guess the point you are making is that
they will all mangle separately anyway?
That seems problematic, because since all have the same return value and
physical arguments, how does the compiler choose an overload to call in
various circumstances?
I think I (mistakenly?) presumed they would all mangle the same, since
they have the same physical signature (return value + physical args),
and therefore all be the same function (eliminating the duplicates).
Template arguments are part of the mangled name. Example:
int foo (string a) (int b)
{
return b;
}
int bar (int b)
{
return b;
}
assert(foo!("a").mangleof == "_D4main17__T3fooVAyaa1_61Z3fooFNaNbNfiZi");
assert(foo!("abcdefg").mangleof ==
"_D4main29__T3fooVAyaa7_61626364656667Z3fooFNaNbNfiZi");
assert(bar.mangleof == "_D4main3barFiZi");
--
/Jacob Carlborg
