eugenis added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D14411#306722, @EricWF wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D14411#306716, @EricWF wrote: > > > Why does this depend on http://reviews.llvm.org/D15404? > > > Woops, I meant the tuple patch but I see the other comment now. I'm curious > as to how inlininging ends up affecting which overload's SFINAE are evaluated. As I understand, in that test we pick a default(?) constructor instead of a move(?) constructor, and end up reading uninitialized memory. Then any code change can affect the test result. Like adding -O2 does, for example. > Drive by comment: Is the change from > `__attribute__((__visibility__("hidden"), __always_inline__))` to > `__attribute__((__internal_linkage__))` ABI compatible? I think so. I'll verify tomorrow. Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D14411 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
