Re: Another mangling issue
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Another mangling issue
- To: austern@xxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Another mangling issue
- From: Martin von Loewis <loewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:07:57 +0200
> I propose that we change the mangling for a function of no arguments,
> and that we mangle it as a function with a single argument of type
> void. Under this proposal _ZN1X1fE would unambiguously demangle
> as X::f, and the mangling for X::f() would be _ZN1X1fEv.
That sounds good to me.
Martin