Re: fix for PR 4447: is this really correct?

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>]

On Dec  1, 2001, Kriang Lerdsuwanakij <lerdsuwa@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> I have checked the ABI specifications
> (http://www.codesourcery.com/cxx-abi/abi.html)
> before starting on this patch.  And this bloat mangling behavior is
> what the ABI intended.

Right.  The C++ Standard paragraph referenced in that paragraph of the
ABI requires this behavior in the mangling of overloads of function
templates.  Constant folding is still applied to template arguments
*referenced* within the definition of the template function, before
overload resolution (in case of references to template functions) or
specialization resolution (in case of template classes), and encodings
of such referenced symbols may be constant-folded.  But the template
function names must enable one to tell the sequence of tokens used in
the template function definition, except for template argument names.

> (C++ Standard reference 14.5.5.1 p. 5.)

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me