Title
Equivalent but not functionally-equivalent redeclarations
Status
drafting
Section
13.7.8 [temp.alias]
Submitter
Richard Smith

Created on 2014-08-04.00:00:00 last changed 114 months ago

Messages

Date: 2014-11-15.00:00:00

Notes from the November, 2014 meeting:

CWG felt that these two declarations should not be equivalent.

Date: 2014-08-04.00:00:00

In an example like

  template<typename T, typename U> using X = T;
  template<typename T> X<void, typename T::type> f();
  template<typename T> X<void, typename T::other> f();

it appears that the second declaration of f is a redeclaration of the first but distinguishable by SFINAE, i.e., equivalent but not functionally equivalent.

History
Date User Action Args
2014-11-24 00:00:00adminsetmessages: + msg5226
2014-08-04 00:00:00admincreate