On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Rafael Espíndola < [email protected]> wrote:
> > Especially troubling is that if you remove the explicit instantiation > > declaration, we no longer emit the vtable, so if this *is* necessary for > > some reason, we're not doing it right. > > Yes, that has to be a bug. > > > So... I think this was originally incorrect, and still works only due to > a > > bug. The attached patch fixes the glitch, but I wanted to make sure I'm > not > > missing some subtlety here before going ahead with this. > > Looks like the test was first added in r99226. The relevant email > thread seems to be > > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20100322/028636.html > > Reading it again it seems that the real bug was the vtable not being > produced on the use, and me being confused about specializations > having key functions. > > LGTM. Thanks for catching this. > Thanks for digging into the history here! Committed as r204686.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
