dexonsmith added a comment. In D56802#1360316 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D56802#1360316>, @rjmccall wrote:
> We've tossed around the idea of doing things like this before, but I was > hoping that it wouldn't have to be specific to `NSObject` and that we'd e.g. > have an attribute that guarantees that the `@interface` declares all the > ivars for a class. Are we still thinking that? The attribute idea hasn't yet survived language discussions (too much of an ABI foot-gun for library evolution). But it's safe to move forward with something `NSObject`-specific since it's already baked into the ABI. > Even if this is just a step towards that, I think we should at least add a > method to answer whether we have a statically-known layout for the class, > rather than hard-coding that decision at the leaves like this. A method makes sense to me too. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D56802/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D56802 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
