[cxx-abi-dev] Use of "sr" mangling code

[Mark Mitchell]

--On Monday, October 14, 2002 11:45:20 PM -0700 Dennis Handly 
<dhandly at cup.hp.com> wrote:

>>  template <typename T> void g (S<&T::operator- >) {}
>> The key question is whether "operator+" should be treated as unary or
>> binary.                      ^^^^^^^^^
>
> I assume you meant operator-?

Yes, thanks; my original test case had "operator+", but then I didn't
want to reopen the pl/ps issue.

> HP gives an error on explicit instantiation and crashes on implicit.

OK, Intel?

-- 
Mark Mitchell                mark at codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC            http://www.codesourcery.com