Is the return type part of the function signature?

by

Normal functions do not include the return type in their signature.

(note: i’ve rewritten this answer, and the comments below don’t apply to this revision – see the edit-history for details).

Introduction

However, the matter about functions and function declarations in the Standard is complicated. There are two layers that have to be considered:

  • Declarations
  • Entities

The so-called function declaration may declare a function entity or a template entity. If a function entity is declared, then you either have to do with an explicit specialization of a function template (with all arguments specified), or a declaration of an ordinary function. If a template entity is declared, then you are declaring a primary function template, or an explicit specialization where some arguments are not specified. (This is very similar to the relation of “object declaration” and objects or references: The former may declare either an object or a reference. So an object declaration may not necessarily declare an object!).

The Standard defines the signature of a function to include the following at 1.3.10:

The types of its parameters and, if the function is a class member, the cv- qualifiers (if any) on the function itself and the class in which the member function is declared. The signature of a function template specialization includes the types of its template arguments. (14.5.5.1)

It’s missing the return type in this definition, which is part of the signature of a function template specialization (i.e a function declaration that declares a function which is a specialization of a template), as pointed out by 14.5.5.1 (recent C++0x working papers fixed that already to mention the return type in 1.3.10 too):

The signature of a function template specialization consists of the signature of the function template and of the actual template arguments (whether explicitly specified or deduced).

The signature of a function template consists of its function signature, its return type and its template parameter list.

So what exactly does a signature contain, again?

So, when we ask about the signature of a function, we have to give two answers:

  • For functions that are specializations of function templates, the signature includes the return type.
  • For functions that are not specializations, the return type is not part of the signature.

Notice, however, that the return type, in any case, is a significant part of the type of a function. That is, the following is not valid:

void f();
int (*pf)() = &f; // different types!

When is an overload invalid if only the return type differs?

Major compilers currently reject the following code:

int f();
double f(); // invalid

But accept the following code:

template<typename T> int f();
template<typename T> double f(); // invalid?

However, the Standard does forbid a function declaration that only differs in the return type (when defining when an overload is valid, and when not). It does not define precisely what “differs only by return type” means, though.

Standard paragraph references:

  • When can a function declaration be overloaded: 13.1
  • What is a function declaration: 7/2 and 7/5
  • What is the signature of a function template/specialization: 14.5.5.1

For reference, here is what the most recent C++0x draft n3000 says about “signature” in 1.3.11, which is much more complete in its coverage of the different type of entities:

the name and the parameter type list (8.3.5) of a function, as well as the class or namespace of which it is a member. If a function or function template is a class member its signature additionally includes the cv-qualifiers (if any) and the ref-qualifier (if any) on the function or function template itself. The signature of a function template additionally includes its return type and its template parameter list. The signature of a function template specialization includes the signature of the template of which it is a specialization and its template arguments (whether explicitly specified or deduced). [ Note: Signatures are used as a basis for name mangling and linking. — end note ]

More Related Contents:

  1. how can i increase the speed of my C++ calculation [closed]
  2. Optimization code for a debug function (c++11 with templates) [closed]
  3. Matrix Printing using Pointers [closed]
  4. C++ Creating a parking charge
  5. Possibilities to quit a function
  6. Why pass by const reference instead of by value?
  7. Overload a C++ function according to the return value
  8. How to convert a lambda to an std::function using templates
  9. Meaning of = delete after function declaration
  10. Why is std::function not equality comparable?
  11. Top-level const doesn’t influence a function signature
  12. Which is more efficient: Return a value vs. Pass by reference?
  13. Why does C++ allow unnamed function parameters?
  14. Is there a way to pass auto as an argument in C++?
  15. Using multiple .cpp files in c++ program?
  16. Inferring the call signature of a lambda or arbitrary callable for “make_function”
  17. Why use a const member function?
  18. Is there still a use for inline? [duplicate]
  19. Declare variables at top of function or in separate scopes?
  20. Is there any way a C/C++ program can crash before main()?
  21. Why I can access member functions even after the object was deleted?
  22. Calling a function in main
  23. C++ Function Callbacks: Cannot convert from a member function to a function signature
  24. Pointer to array of unspecified size “(*p)[]” illegal in C++ but legal in C
  25. About Pointers To Functions in function declarations
  26. What happens when a function that returns an object ends without a return statement
  27. Why the initializer of std::function has to be CopyConstructible?
  28. Why am I able to make a function call using an invalid class pointer
  29. Use of ‘auto func(int)’ before deduction of ‘auto’ in C++14
  30. How does the friend keyword (Class/Function) break encapsulation in C++?

Leave a Comment