[expr.reflect] Last example assumes sizeof(int)!=1 without saying as such

[Halalaluyafail3]

[expr.reflect] example 4:

template<typename T> void fn() requires (^^T != ^^int);
template<typename T> void fn() requires (^^T == ^^int);
template<typename T> void fn() requires (sizeof(T) == sizeof(int));

constexpr std::meta::info a = ^^fn<char>;       // OK
constexpr std::meta::info b = ^^fn<int>;        // error: ambiguous

The validity of these being different only makes sense if sizeof(int) is not one. Replacing int with a type such as char[2] would remove the assumption.

[term-est]

char[2] looks a little ugly. Perhaps we can use void instead

constexpr std::meta::info a = ^^fn<void>;       // OK
constexpr std::meta::info b = ^^fn<int>;        // error: ambiguous

[jensmaurer]

sizeof(void) is ill-formed; we don't want to confuse the example with unrelated breakage.

[eisenwave]

Suggestion:

template<typename T> void fn() requires (^^T == ^^char[1]);
template<typename T> void fn() requires (^^T == ^^char[2]);
template<typename T> void fn() requires (sizeof(T) == 2);

constexpr std::meta::info a = ^^fn<char[1]>;       // OK
constexpr std::meta::info b = ^^fn<char[2]>;       // error: ambiguous