Skip to content

[temp.over.link] Reword to clarify that declarations correspond #5999

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 5, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
18 changes: 11 additions & 7 deletions source/templates.tex
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3908,15 +3908,19 @@
whether two constructs are equivalent, and they are
functionally equivalent but not equivalent, the program is ill-formed,
no diagnostic required.
% FIXME: What does it mean for two function templates to correspond?
Furthermore, if two function templates that do not correspond
Furthermore, if two declarations $A$ and $B$ of function templates
\begin{itemize}
\item have the same name,
\item have corresponding signatures\iref{basic.scope.scope},
\item would declare the same entity\iref{basic.link} considering them to correspond, and
% FIXME: What does it mean for a set of template argument lists to satisfy a function template?
\item accept and are satisfied by the same set of template argument lists,
\item
introduce the same name,
\item
have corresponding signatures\iref{basic.scope.scope},
\item
would declare the same entity,
when considering $A$ and $B$ to correspond in that determination\iref{basic.link}, and
\item
accept and are satisfied by the same set of template argument lists,
\end{itemize}
but do not correspond,
the program is ill-formed, no diagnostic required.

\pnum
Expand Down
Loading