[cxx-abi-dev] Mangling "transaction-safe function"

[Jason Merrill]

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 <jason at redhat.com> 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