Hi,
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, H.J. Lu wrote:
> I thought
>
> ---
> An empty type is a type where it and all of its subobjects (recursively)
> are of class, structure, union, or array type.
> ---
>
> excluded
>
> struct empty
> {
> empty () = default;
> };
Why would that be excluded? There are no subobjects, hence all of them
are of class, structure, union or array type, hence this is an empty type.
(And that's good, it indeed looks quite empty to me). Even if you would
add a non-trivial copy ctor, making this thing not trivially copyable
anymore, it would still be empty. Hence, given your proposed language in
the psABI, without reference to any other ABI (in particular not to the
Itanium C++ ABI), you would then need to pass it without registers. That
can't be done, and that's exactly why I find that wording incomplete. It
needs implicit references to other languages ABIs to work.
> Adding "trivially copyable" extends, not limiting, the scope of
> empty type.
Huh? Adding (as in ANDing, not ORing) anything to a positive condition
necessarily restricts it. But also note, that my wording does _not_ add
the restriction to the definition of "empty type", but rather only to when
they can be passed/returned by nothing.
Ciao,
Michael.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
