rjmccall added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45384#1060192, @ahatanak wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45384#1060164, @rjmccall wrote:
> > Well, but I think CanPassInRegisters==false in the base class does always
> > mean CanPassInRegisters==false in the subclass.
> I think there are cases that is not true. If I compile the following code, S0
> (base class) is passed indirectly and S1 (derived class) is passed directly.
Yes, I think you're right. That's exciting.
So "cannot pass in registers" is tracking whether there's a primitive reason
that the class cannot be passed in registers, something that's above and beyond
the C++ rules? Okay.
Comment at: include/clang/AST/DeclCXX.h:486
+ /// for this class to be passed in registers.
+ unsigned CannotPassInRegisters : 1;
You should definitely explain the semantic difference with CanPassInRegisters
in this comment, and I think the field/method names should underline that.
Maybe this is a place to pull out "Primitive" again?
cfe-commits mailing list