MadCoder added a comment. In D73208#1835051 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73208#1835051>, @dexonsmith wrote:
> Why isn't a similar dance needed for non-direct methods? because non direct methods do not need an `llvm::Function` to be synthesized at the call-site. direct methods do, and they form one with the type of the declaration they see. Then that same `llvm::Function` is used when you CodeGen the Implementation, so if there's a mismatch, sadness ensues because the LLVM IR verifier will notice the discrepancy between the declared return type of the function and the actual types coming out of the `ret` codepaths. Regular obj-C methods use the _implementation_ types for the codegen (the declaration(s) aren't even consulted) and I want to stick at what obj-c does as much as I can. (as a data point: If you use obj-C types with C functions, the type of the first declaration seen is used instead). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D73208/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D73208 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
