lgtm
================
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/ItaniumCXXABI.cpp:1950
@@ +1949,3 @@
+
+namespace {
+class ItaniumRTTIBuilder {
----------------
David Majnemer wrote:
> Reid Kleckner wrote:
> > Looks like the Itanium code paths weigh in at ~900 lines and the MS ones at
> > ~500. That's kind of my internal threshold for "this deserves it's own
> > file". IIRC you considered but rejected ItaniumRTTI.cpp. Why? I don't
> > see any problem with a lib/CodeGen/ItaniumRTTI.h that exposes some free
> > functions that ItaniumCXXABI calls to.
> As an example:
> `ItaniumCXXABI::getAddrOfRTTIDescriptor` refers to `ItaniumRTTIBuilder`.
> Either we somehow expose a `CXXABIRTTIBuilder` base class for both of them
> (as well as factory functions to create them) or we just merge them into
> their respective ABI implementations.
>
> I can do either but it made more sense, to me, to avoid creating another
> interface.
OK, sgtm. We don't want a base class. The interface won't be the same. In
Itanium, the type info object has all the relevant data, whereas in MS the
other data points to the type_info struct.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D4261
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
