ostannard marked 4 inline comments as done. ostannard added a comment. > It isn't that common, but it seems worth doing if it can be done easily.
> That said, I note that it does appear that your implementation will end up > preserving the pointer in the vtable in this case because you're relying on > the use list to make decisions about what to GC. So it doesn't seem easy to > do at this point, but if for example we made this compatible with ThinLTO at > some point we would probably not be able to rely on the use list, and the > resulting changes to this feature might make this easier to do. Ok, I think that it makes sense to leave this for a separate patch, as long as we currently generate correct code. I've added partial linking of the LTO unit to my fuzzer, and haven't found any problems. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63932/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D63932 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
