LGTM Two "reverse review" kind of questions below :P
================ Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGDeclCXX.cpp:269 @@ +268,3 @@ + llvm::raw_svector_ostream Out(FnName); + getCXXABI().getMangleContext().mangleDynamicInitializer(D, Out); + } ---------------- Interesting: I've seen a few instances of code like this: SmallString<256> FnName; llvm::raw_svector_ostream Out(FnName); getCXXABI().getMangleContext().mangleDynamicInitializer(D, Out); Out.flush(); without the scope. Personally, I like your code more, but not sure what's the reason for the "old" (?) way to get the mangled symbol. Is it just legacy? ================ Comment at: lib/AST/MicrosoftMangle.cpp:1975 @@ -1970,3 +1974,3 @@ MicrosoftCXXNameMangler Mangler(*this, Out); - Mangler.getStream() << "\01??__F"; + Mangler.getStream() << "\01??__" << CharCode; Mangler.mangleName(D); ---------------- Hm, I've seen a few snippets like this: MicrosoftCXXNameMangler Mangler(*this, Out); ... Out << ...; ... instead of MicrosoftCXXNameMangler Mangler(*this, Out); ... Mangler.getStream() << ...; ... Any ideas which one is better? http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1477 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
