Could they be safely identified by their mangled name? Do they have a unique 
prefix?

-- adrian
> On Oct 14, 2016, at 10:14 AM, Arnold Schwaighofer <aschwaigho...@apple.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> No, this is not the case. Objective-C method thunks use the _T prefix and 
> follow the c calling convention.
> 
>> On Oct 13, 2016, at 1:10 PM, Adrian Prantl <apra...@apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>> My understanding was that once Swift switches to the new calling convention, 
>> every function in the Swift namespace (^_T.*) would implicitly use the Swift 
>> calling convention. If this assertion should for some reason not be true, we 
>> will have to decorate the functions in DWARF with a calling convention 
>> attribute.
>> 
>> -- adrian
>>> On Oct 13, 2016, at 1:06 PM, Arnold Schwaighofer <aschwaigho...@apple.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 13, 2016, at 12:47 PM, Todd Fiala <tfi...@apple.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> e identify C/C++ code that was using this calling convention?
>>> 
>>> I think, llvm would have to mark such functions with a DWARF entry?
>>> 
>>> I don’t know how much DWARF info generated by a clang that supports swiftcc 
>>> would shield an older lldb from having to know about that the function call 
>>> was swiftcc.
>> 
> 

_______________________________________________
swift-lldb-dev mailing list
swift-lldb-dev@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-lldb-dev

Reply via email to