andreybokhanko added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11297#235525, @rjmccall wrote:
> Yes, please make it an error.
Done.
John, thank you for all your patience and explanations! -- I understand that
this particular review and patch author required more than the usual measure.
:-(
>
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL246438: PR17829: Proper diagnostic of mangled names
conflicts (authored by asbokhan).
Changed prior to commit:
http://reviews.llvm.org/D11297?vs=33401=33577#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
andreybokhanko added inline comments.
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:2323
@@ -2323,1 +2322,3 @@
+ definition with same mangled name as another definition,
+ InGroupDuplicateMangledNames;
def err_cyclic_alias : Error
rjmccall wrote:
I'm
rjmccall added a comment.
Yes, please make it an error. And the obvious test changes are fine. :)
http://reviews.llvm.org/D11297
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
andreybokhanko marked 3 inline comments as done.
andreybokhanko added a comment.
John,
Thank you for the review!
All your comments but one are fixed. See below for details on the single one I
didn't manage to get fixed.
Andrey
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CodeGenModule.h:354
@@
rjmccall added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CodeGenModule.h:354
@@ +353,3 @@
+ /// call).
+ llvm::DenseSetGlobalDecl ExplicitDefinitions;
+
andreybokhanko wrote:
Checking that a GlobalDecl is not in ExplicitDefinitions yet is actually
required to
andreybokhanko updated this revision to Diff 33083.
andreybokhanko added a comment.
John,
I implemented precisely what you described (or so I believe :-))
Patch is updated; please re-review.
This patch implements support for functions, but not variables yet -- the patch
is big enough already,
rjmccall added a comment.
This looks generally like what I'm looking for, thanks! Some comments.
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CodeGenModule.cpp:1129
@@ +1128,3 @@
+if (GV GV != GetGlobalValue(getMangledName(D)))
+ continue;
+
This is a pretty expensive
andreybokhanko added a comment.
John,
Thank you for the quick reply!
Let me make sure I understand what you said, using my test as an example (BTW,
sorry if this is a dumb question -- I asked our local Clang experts, but no-one
seems to be 100% sure what to do):
1: struct T {
2: ~T()
rjmccall added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11297#223622, @andreybokhanko wrote:
John,
Thank you for the quick reply!
Let me make sure I understand what you said, using my test as an example
(BTW, sorry if this is a dumb question -- I asked our local Clang experts,
but no-one
rjmccall added a comment.
You only have one attempt to define the function here; I don't see the problem.
Recall that I said to add a flag to getOrCreateLLVMFunction that says whether
the caller intends to define the function. The rule should be that only
callers that pass true should be
11 matches
Mail list logo
