DmitryPolukhin added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/AST/ItaniumMangle.cpp:268-290
@@ -265,1 +267,25 @@
+ // abi_tag is a gcc attribute, taking one or more strings called "tags".
+ //
+ // The goal is to annotate against which version of a library an object was
+ // build and to be able to provide backwards compatibility ("dual abi").
+ //
+ // For this the emitted mangled names have to be different, while you don't
+ // want the user to have to use different names in the source.
+ //
+ // The abi_tag can be present on Struct, Var and Function declarations as
+ // "explicit" tag, and on inline Namespace as "implicit" tag. Explicit tags
+ // are always emitted after the unqualified name, and (implicit) tags on
+ // namespace are not.
+ //
+ // For functions and variables there is a set of "implicitly available"
+ // tags. These tags are: all tags from the namespace/structs the name is
+ // embedded in, all tags from any template arguments of the name, and, for
+ // functions, alls tags used anywhere in the <bare-function-type> (i.e.
+ // parameters and sometimes the return type).
+ //
+ // For functions this is basically the list of all tags from the signature
+ // without the unqualified name and usually without the return type of the
+ // function. In `operator Type()` Type is NOT part of that list, as it is
+ // part of the unqualified name!
+ //
----------------
rnk wrote:
> I think it would be a valuable exercise to write up something more concrete
> than this in a .rst file in docs/. I think part of the reason why this patch
> has languished so long is because there is no specification or documentation
> to speak of. This new abi_tag is a major departure from the wonderful
> *standard* Itanium C++ ABI that Unix has enjoyed. On Windows, we suffer
> greatly from having to follow each and every implementation detail that
> Microsoft accidentally baked into their ABI. It would be good if we could put
> together a document that we could send back to someone who works on GCC, so
> that they can verify that that is how abi_tag is intended to work, even if
> GCC deviates from it in some places.
It was part of previous commit with syntax of the attribute, please see
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/ItaniumMangleAbiTags.html
Also as far as I understand, Jason Merrill is going to write some document
about it, see https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23529#c58 a
================
Comment at: lib/AST/ItaniumMangle.cpp:427
@@ +426,3 @@
+ AbiTagState *AbiTags = nullptr;
+ AbiTagState AbiTagsRoot{ AbiTags };
+
----------------
majnemer wrote:
> Is this clang-format'd?
Yes, that is how clang-format formats this in-class {}-initializer. But I
removed it and replaced with initialization in c-tor.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18035
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
