> On Dec 2, 2013, at 9:20 AM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Fariborz Jahanian <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> Author: fjahanian >> Date: Fri Oct 21 17:27:12 2011 >> New Revision: 142693 >> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=142693&view=rev >> Log: >> c++: support gcc's application of weak attribute on >> class declaration which forces any such class and any >> class that inherits from such a class to have their >> typeinfo symbols be marked as weak. >> // rdar://10246395 > > Sorry to resurrect an ancient commit, but I happened to be in the code > working on attribute subjects. > > As best I can tell, gcc does not support this construct. I used the > codegen test from this commit and got: > > http://ideone.com/2TxMtR > http://goo.gl/EU1HT9 (gcc.godbolt.com) > > It seems that it emits a warning in gcc: 'weak' attribute does not > apply to types. > > So the question becomes: should I continue to support weak on a class > declaration with my refactoring, should this feature be removed from > clang, or should there be a separate refactoring to note that this is > a clang-specific extension?
It was an extension in Apple's GCC and yes, please continue to support this in your refactoring: it's still an important feature. We added the feature to Clang specifically because users of Apple GCC requested it. - Doug _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
