MadCoder added a comment. In D69991#1744979 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69991#1744979>, @aprantl wrote:
> Is it intentional that the direct method names use the exact same symbol > namespace (`\01-[class message]`) as "real" Objective-C methods? Could that > be a problem? Should we use a slightly different naming scheme? I don't have an answer here, real compiler folks should answer (ping @rjmccall ?). Two statements: - I would desire for the backtraces in a crash report to still look similar so moving to `_-[class message]` (with the leading `_`) would be fine - the name can't quite collide because you can't define this symbol as both direct and dynamic, so it's effectively always free I can however see why it may or may not confuse the debugger CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69991/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69991 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
