alexshap added a comment. > is that a problem for your codebase?
@zaks.anna - yes it is. > Another possible issue is that we will use the synthesized body if the > function name starts with "OSAtomicCompareAndSwap" since ?>we do not match > the full function name. If the function body is available, there is a higher > chance it is implementing something other >than the standard compare and > swap. We might want to start matching the full names of the functions are are > synthesizing. yeah - i've just wanted to post a comment about it - btw - OSAtomicCompareAndSwap is not the only example (dispatch_sync, dispatch_async etc also create a problem). But in my case i ran into issue on the exact match (but on the other function). I have not updated this patch yet because I have not found a good solution - still thinking (any suggestions appreciated). I probably understand the motivation behind the changes introduced in r264687 but yes, it causes several issues. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D24792 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
