On 12/17/2009 05:58 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Handling this just as unqualified-name template-args seems to work fine; any reason not to just add that to expression? We also need to support a plain identifier for overloaded functions.
Hmm...where this runs into trouble is with operator names. Where t is a function parameter, operator+(t,t) would mangle as clplfp_fp_E, which is ambiguous; it could also mean (t+t)().
So I guess we need something to distinguish an operator name used as a function name from an operator name used as an operator.
Jason