rjmccall added a comment. In D112921#3127767 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112921#3127767>, @rnk wrote:
> Let's not bring back the weak function thunk approach. That approach caused > problems described in my commit, D8467 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D8467>, > which is why the code was removed. The weak function that intercedes if the strong function isn't found statically was, yeah, a poorly thought out idea. Weak *imports* work reliably, at least on Darwin, but they do require SDK support. > The next steps are to sort out right defaults for Apple and understand the > libc++ test failures. Would it be reasonable to take a shortcut here, leave > the feature disabled for Apple targets, and defer those details to those that > own the target? Yes, I think that would be acceptable. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D112921/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D112921 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
