dblaikie added a comment. In D119051#3747673 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D119051#3747673>, @rnk wrote:
> In D119051#3747201 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D119051#3747201>, @dblaikie > wrote: > >> So... my conclusion is that Clang's AArch64 appears to be correct for x86 >> as well, and we should just rename the function and use it unconditionally, >> removing any use of Clang's AST POD property in the MSVC ABI handling? > > Sounds good to me, I think you did the hard work of verifying, thanks for > that. :) > > Anyway, removing this isPOD usage should be it's own patch, with tests. We > should already have test coverage for aarch64 that can be reused. @ayzhao, > can you help David with this? This is not C++20-related, but it is clang > frontend related. Popping the stack, the use of AST's isPOD in Microsoft's ABI has been removed in favor of more nuanced custom implementation in the Microsoft ABI handling that fixed a few bugs along the way (D133817 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D133817>, D134688 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134688>). I've rebased this patch and addressed a test failure I hadn't spotted before, in `clang/test/AST/conditionally-trivial-smfs.cpp` - added some details to the patch description. And now that the Microsoft ABI doesn't depend on the AST isPOD property at all, I've removed the previously proposed new test `clang/test/CodeGenCXX/return-abi.cpp` that was testing the Microsoft return ABI. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D119051/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D119051 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
