On May 24, 2012, at 10:03 PM, Charles Davis wrote:
> On May 24, 2012, at 5:53 AM, John McCall wrote:
>> On May 24, 2012, at 4:35 AM, Timur Iskhodzhanov wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:44 PM, João Matos <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> Attached is a patch that introduces template mangling (at least in the
>>>>>> simple cases) as well as some tests for the code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you please review it?
>>>> I'm only wondering if there is any other template argument kind we need to
>>>> handle.
>>> We'll find out as we compile more code with Clang.
>>> Currently, even simple programs with templates are miscompiled, the
>>> suggested patch should cover most of the cases.
>>> I hope all other cases will hit the assertion and then we can deal
>>> with minimized test cases.
>>>
>>> The current patch (plus one more patch to handle back referenes)
>>> mangles templates from googletest and iostream just fine (at least
>>> without obvious problems).
>>>
>>>> The patch looks fine to me.
>>> Can I commit or should I wait for John's review?
>>
>> Please wait for my review; I'll get to it before the end of the week.
> Here's a patch of my own that has the various pieces of Timur's patch
> factored into their own functions. (I think it's nicer this way, and it
> matches the layout of ItaniumMangle.cpp more closely. Your call.)
I like it factored like this, thank you.
+void MicrosoftCXXNameMangler::mangleNumber(llvm::APSInt Value) {
Take this by reference, please.
+ default:
+ llvm_unreachable("Don't know how to mangle this kind of template
argument yet!");
Never use unreachable for as-yet-unsupported features. Report an error
instead; ItaniumMangle.cpp has some examples of how to do that from here. If
an error is completely blocking work, at least emit a warning.
With these changes, this is approved.
John.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
