Function templates with more than one declaration?

[Bill Baxter]

Brian Palmer wrote:

> The ideal, in my mind, would be to create Atom literals with the same
> Atom("name") syntax usable for creating Atoms at runtime. I'm pretty
> sure that won't be possible until templates can override functions,
> though. But I'd at least like to get rid of that last spurious
> `.atom` at the end of the declaration. Has anybody run into this
> situation before? What's the reason for only allowing "Implicit
> Template Properties" when the template declares exactly one member,
> anyway?

That's another oldie but a goodie.  Been discussed before.  At least it 
should be possible to have some extra private members inside those 
"Implicit Template Property" templates.  But right now there's no way to 
express "private to the template".

--bb