base class function reflected ? about refl-cpp HOT 4 CLOSED

That is known behavior and is expected. Your access_xy defined two x and y member functions with different const-qualifiers. So the question is which one you would like to reflect. By shadowing the definitions of the two functions, the visible x and y are not const-qualified and that is why it is possible to resolve to a singular function pointer.

Maybe it would be possible for me to suggest a better solution if I had more information about the use case. What would you do with the function pointers? Are they being stored somewhere? Why is function_descriptor#operator() or even refl::runtime::invoke() not sufficient? Both will correctly invoke the proper overload.

from refl-cpp.

Yeah renaming solved my problem totally !

from refl-cpp.

It's because of the const qualifier the scripting system where i was registering type was thinking i try to register a null pointer to member

from refl-cpp.

Yes, adding a get/set prefix is another viable solution.
I am glad you've resolved the issue!

from refl-cpp.