rjmccall added a comment. Yeah, both COFF and Mach-O have longstanding ways to protect linker dead-stripping, and the compiler already has to manually trigger them on those targets for `used`, so it's certainly implementable to also trigger them for `retain`-without-`used`. I just don't think it's a very good feature. It seems to me that the use cases of `retain`-without-`used` all basically boil down to "Definition A relies on Definition B in some way that isn't just a symbol reference." `retain`-without-`used` is at best a very rough way of achieving that underlying goal of forcing Definition B to be emitted if something requires Definition A, and what we really want is a way to express that dependence so that the compiler/linker can still strip Definition B if Definition A is also stripped.
Also in this space, I think we still don't have a way to express `llvm.compiler_used` in the source language, i.e. "feel free to dead-strip this if it's never referenced, but if it is referenced, there will be funny uses of it that the compiler can't reason about". Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D96838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D96838 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
