https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #27 from Gašper Ažman <gasper.azman at gmail dot com> --- I think there is an example in the standard that distinguishes those two as far as overload resolution is concerned. On Thu, Jan 11, 2024, 21:08 waffl3x at protonmail dot com < gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609 > > --- Comment #26 from waffl3x <waffl3x at protonmail dot com> --- > (In reply to corentinjabot from comment #25) > > Hey folks. > > Congrats on landing support for deducing this in GCC. > > Thanks! > > > While there is no spec for it, after discussion here, > > https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/148 explicit objects > > parameters are mangled with `H` > > This is the form that has been adopted for Clang. > > > > The reason we need mangling is because WG21 made the following > well-formed > > (and that was reaffirmed. In fact, some complexity was added by P2797) > > > > > > struct S { > > static void f(S); > > void f(this S); > > }; > > > > And we need a way to distinguish both functions > > I wasn't sure you were aware of this; I hope that form of mangling will > work > > for you. > > > > > > Thanks > > I don't have the experience to comment but my gut says this is a weird > outcome. Oh well! I think I know how to implement this so I'll give it > a go at some point today. If I have any trouble I'll leave it for > someone else. > > Thanks for informing us. > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You are on the CC list for the bug.
