From doug.gregor at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 05:31:18 2012 From: doug.gregor at gmail.com (Doug Gregor) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 22:31:18 -0700 Subject: [cxx-abi-dev] [Cxx-abi-dev] Mangling 'this' in trailing-return-type In-Reply-To: References: <4E0E9414.5050108@redhat.com> <4E11CEE6.8020406@redhat.com> <15ACBBBF-DB9D-4990-B486-8BB564F896CE@edg.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:36 AM, John McCall wrote: > On Sep 20, 2011, at 5:35 AM, Mike Herrick wrote: >> We think the implicit and explicit cases should have different manglings even if, from a SFINAE standpoint, they're treated the same, and have a preference for the "mangled as written" implicit mangling. > > I agree. ?Technically, this means that lookups that find class members and those that don't will be mangled the same, despite the impact on ADL, but the mangled-as-written mantra already causes us to gloss over stuff like that, and I can't think of a situation where it's a problem with valid code. I don't see a resolution to this. Do we stick with GCC's "(*this)." mangling, or mangle as written? - Doug