From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id A923A3858D39; Wed, 17 May 2023 10:13:22 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A923A3858D39
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1684318402;
	bh=i9c0dzdG71hEHGIHYN00TBcmryqV+IMT29CjpBZ41W4=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=dpIIGtk/5MX2pDuXfG900/PLjiP+Hg2Na72JuSh55qvi/rjBvteE+oZPeLWaw5fvb
	 43lx9S0yTs3jbOYY2MEZx5ihSXbKdAW65RFl4jw12awlkvifdKRkxNfUDjGxdRdEu8
	 LKAueJ/z+ToFl0CHM1vWf3UT/4WAg6Fr3IEDsiVs=
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/109887] Different mangled name for template specialization
 for clang and gcc
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 10:13:22 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.3.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ABI
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-109887-4-A7H9dxj8eN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109887-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109887-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109887

--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Chuanqi Xu from comment #0)
> _ZNK1n1S3getIbEENSt9enable_ifIXsrSt11is_integralIT_E5valueEN4llvm8Optiona=
lIS4
> _EEE4typeENS6_9StringRefE
> ```
>=20
> and clang will mangle it as:
>=20
> ```
> _ZNK1n1S3getIbEENSt9enable_ifIXsr3std11is_integralIT_EE5valueEN4llvm8Opti=
onal
> IS3_EEE4typeENS4_9StringRefE

The difference is that GCC mangles std::is_integral as St11is_integral and
Clang mangles it as 3std::is_integral. I think GCC is right.

Clang uses St9enable_if for std::enable_if so I don't knwo why it doesn't u=
se
the St substitution for std::is_integral.=