That's my understanding as well -- they're pretty goofy to have as type attributes, truth be told. But we should still be consistent with the way they're mangled (eg, if you use __ptr64 in a 32-bit build, does it get mangled as such even though you have a 32-bit pointer).
~Aaron On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Charles Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > > He means you should add a Clang test case (like you did in {D99}) showing > that names get mangled properly in 64-bit mode. (Speaking of which, I have > something to say about that over there...) > > @AaronBallman The mangling for `__ptr32` is... nothing. This mangling > scheme predates support for 64-bit pointers (and `__ptr64`). In fact, > `__ptr64` was something that was tacked on later--hence why 64-bit pointer > types have a special flag '`E`' set in their mangled names. This was carried > over into the Win64 environment. Why? I don't know; probably because it makes > the 64-bit mangler simpler (i.e. it's essentially identical to the 32-bit > one). > > http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D101 > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
