On Aug 29, 2013, at 10:38 PM, Richard Smith wrote: > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 9:18 PM, Charles Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:53 PM, Richard Smith wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Charles Davis <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:38 PM, Richard Smith wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Reid Kleckner <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> I'd prefer that the ms_abi and sysv_abi attributes are instead mapped to >>> different calling conventions on different targets (so we never use >>> CC_X86_64SysV in cases where it is the same as CC_C). >>> >>> I believe the last patch implements that. >>> >>> Hmm, maybe I'm looking at the wrong patch then. The patch that I'm looking >>> at always maps AT_MSABI to CC_X86_64Win64, then does a fixup from that to >>> CC_C in checkCallingConvention for some targets. >> Heh. :) >> >> I think I know what he's talking about. Something like this, maybe? >> >> Perfect =) > Excellent! No further objections, I trust? > > Not from me. Thanks, r189644.
Chip
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
