Notes from the meeting

[Martin von Loewis]

>      Upon further thought, though, I don't think this is needed.  The
>      two functions have different definitions, with different
>      hierarchical names.  The result adjustment is determined by which
>      function is called and where it is called from, and there
>      shouldn't be an opportunity to confuse them.
> 
>      Am I missing something?

I think so, yes. What do you mean by "hierarchical names"? Consider

struct A{};struct B:primary,A{};

struct Base{
  virtual A* func(int);  // _ZN4Base4funcEi
};

struct Derived:Base{
  B* func(int);
};

Now, _ZN7Derived4funcEi refers to - what? In the vtable of Derived,
you have two slots - what symbols do you put in there?

The obvious solution would be to have

  _ZN7Derived4funcEP1Ai  // A* Derived::func(int)
  _ZN7Derived4funcEP1Bi  // B* Derived::func(int)

However, that won't work, because e.g. the first one is confused with

  Ret? Derived::func(A*, int)

and the same confusion arises for the second one. Was there any
concrete proposal in the meeting?

If not, here is a strawman proposal: Markup a return type, so you can
tell whether a type in the parameter list is the first parameter or
the return type:

  <return type> ::= _ <type>

With that, we'd get

  _ZN4Base4funcEi         // Ret? Base::func(int)
  _ZN7Derived4funcE_P1Ai  // A* Derived::func(int)
  _ZN7Derived4funcE_P1Bi  // B* Derived::func(int)

Regards,
Martin