On 2 April 2026 04:48:53 BST, Keenan Horrigan via Std-Discussion <std-discussion_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Today I was poking around some more with reflection, and I came up with the following code which would appear to "peel off" particular overloads out of a function's overload set, getting a reflection of one overload of that function:
>
>void function(int integer) {
> std::printf("int\n");
>}
>
>void function(char character) {
> std::printf("char\n");
>}
>
>consteval auto get_function_int() {
> void function(int);
>
> return ^^function;
>}
>
>static_assert(
> identifier_of(
> parameters_of(get_function_int())[0]
> )
>
> == "integer"
>);
>
>int main() {
> [: get_function_int() :]('h');
>}
>
>On both GCC and the experimental Clang reflection branch, this prints "int" and the static assert succeeds: https://godbolt.org/z/5caY3rh8d
>
>On Clang you can even have
>
>template<typename T>
>consteval auto get_function() {
> void function(T);
>
> return ^^function;
>}
>
>And then get at the overload generically like 'get_function<int>()'. GCC currently runs into an internal error with that, though: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=124756
>
>But basically, I was wondering if this is valid behavior or not. It would be potentially useful, since I'm not aware of another way to get a reflection of a particular overload from an overload set. But I'm unsure if I could rely on this behavior.

You can also reflect on the namespace (^^::) and iterate through its members to get each individual overload, AFAIK.

>
>Thanks