Bug 10556 – mixin template fails overload resolution

Status
NEW
Severity
normal
Priority
P3
Component
dmd
Product
D
Version
D2
Platform
All
OS
All
Creation time
2013-07-06T07:06:03Z
Last change time
2024-12-13T18:08:53Z
Assigned to
No Owner
Creator
monarchdodra
See also
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8074
Moved to GitHub: dmd#18621 →

Comments

Comment #0 by monarchdodra — 2013-07-06T07:06:03Z
--------mixin template fooImpl(T) { static void foo(T t) {} } struct S{} mixin fooImpl!S; mixin fooImpl!int; mixin fooImpl!long; void main() { S s; int a; foo(s); foo(a); //17 } -------- hello.d 17 Error: hello.fooImpl!(int).foo at hello.d:3 conflicts with hello.fooImpl!(long).foo at hello.d:3 -------- Here, I'm using mixin template fooImpl to create a finite set of non-template functions. In particular, I'm generating the functions "foo(int)" and "foo(long)". Yet, when making the call to "foo" with an int, the compiler complains of finding multiple matches, failing to "see" that there is an exact match. Apparently, I think the compiler sees "foo" as template functions "fooImpl!long.foo(long)", so they all equally match. I think this is wrong behavior. The specs state that "If two different mixins are put in the same scope, and each define a declaration with the same name, there is an ambiguity error when the declaration is referenced", however this is clearly not the case, since "foo(s)" is correctly resolved. foo(int) and foo(long) should also correctly resolve just as well.
Comment #1 by monarchdodra — 2013-07-06T07:09:46Z
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8074 8074 is related, although it deals with "strictly non-ambiguous overloads". In this example, there are multiple matches, but one is "exact".
Comment #2 by kiithsacmp — 2015-01-01T04:53:34Z
Any progress on this issue? I've just run into it in my code; can work around with a string mixin but the result is much uglier.
Comment #3 by robert.schadek — 2024-12-13T18:08:53Z
THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GITHUB https://github.com/dlang/dmd/issues/18621 DO NOT COMMENT HERE ANYMORE, NOBODY WILL SEE IT, THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GITHUB