On Monday, 19 September 2016 at 21:14:38 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Monday, 19 September 2016 at 21:09:37 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote:

I don't know if I would call this a "destabalizing" language change though. It should be backwards compatible with the existing semantics. It adds an extra step to type deduction, but this would be the very last step of type deduction so it would not override any existing semantics.

Consider void functionOrTemplate() {...} and functionOrTemplate(uint N = 1)() {...}

Oh you're right, I didn't think that templates could share the same name as functions. You can't do this with classes:

class classOrTemplate { }
class classOrTemplate(uint N=1) { }

With this new information, yes this would be a "destabalizing" language change. Thanks for the example. I'm against this.

Reply via email to