On Jul 23, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Timur Iskhodzhanov wrote: > Hi Charles, John, > > Can you please see > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13434 > ? > It seems like this case has never been tested before. > > I've written some tests and made a simple fix to the code. > > It's not thoroughly tested on all cases but IMO adding at least some > new coverage and making all new tests pass by a simple is a good > progress to start with. > > Two questions: > 1) See the FIXME comment in MicrosoftMangle - I do think the whole > comment should be made less cryptic. > Probably I'll need some help from Charles to decipher this :) I already acted on that suggestion. You can safely remove the 'I'll probably have…' part. > > 2) See the zeta mangling in mangle-ms.cpp - not sure if changing the > mangling there is a problem at all, as "blocks" are never > compiled/mangled by MSVS (they are clang-specific extensions). OK, but what about lambdas?
Oh, and, as John said, the mangling of a block pointer should resemble that of a function pointer (i.e. no '$$A6'). > > Can you please review the patch? Seems to me that the '$$A' part is specific to template parameters that are neither pointers nor references to functions. What happens in those cases? The '6' is probably because this is a global (near) function. What happens when the NTTP is a member function? (Can you even do that?) Chip _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
