On 12/17/2009 07:09 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
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.
New patch adds "on" (operator name) before an operator name used as an
unqualified name. It isn't necessary in . and -> expressions, since we
already know that the second operand is a name.