Xiangling_L marked 3 inline comments as done.
Xiangling_L added inline comments.

Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/ItaniumCXXABI.cpp:520
+class XLCXXABI final : public ItaniumCXXABI {
sfertile wrote:
> Xiangling_L wrote:
> > sfertile wrote:
> > > Here would be a good place to add a comment to indicate that XL has 
> > > several C++ ABIs, but this represents the one used in 'xlClang++'.
> > You mean we have legacy XLC and XLClang++ ABI? But for static init, they 
> > have same implementation. So it's not a must to point it out. 
> > 
> > And also AFAIK, `static init` is the only thing we will differ from Generic 
> > Itanium ABI in the frontend, so basically it's the only thing we will add 
> > in this ABI.
> > 
> > I am okay with either way with a little concern that legacy XLC user may 
> > wonder is there any difference of static init implementation between XLC 
> > and XLClang++ ABI if we add the comment.
> Sorry, I had a matching comment on the 'XL' enum, but I must have deleted it 
> accidentally before submitting. I said I agreed with using just 'XL' since 
> there is only one XL C++ ABI implemented in Clang we don't have to worry 
> about differentiating between the 'legacy' XL and the C++11 XL ABIs. If you 
> did want to clarify then adding a comment here would be the only thing I 
> suggest.
I see. Thank you for your clarification.



cfe-commits mailing list

Reply via email to