efriedma added a comment.
I'm tempted to say this is a bugfix for the implementation of
no_unique_address, and just fix it globally for all ABIs. We're never going to
get anything done here if we require a separate patch for each ABI variant
clang supports.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/TargetInfo.cpp:524
+ if (isa<CXXRecordDecl>(RT->getDecl()) &&
+ !(AllowNoUniqueAddr && FD->hasAttr<NoUniqueAddressAttr>()))
return false;
----------------
Does this do the right thing with a field that's an array of empty classes?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/TargetInfo.cpp:7245
// do count. So do anonymous bitfields that aren't zero-sized.
- if (getContext().getLangOpts().CPlusPlus &&
- FD->isZeroLengthBitField(getContext()))
- continue;
+ if (getContext().getLangOpts().CPlusPlus) {
+ if (FD->isZeroLengthBitField(getContext()))
----------------
Only loosely relevant to this patch, but checking getLangOpts().CPlusPlus here
seems weird; doesn't that break calling functions defined in C from C++ code?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D81583/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D81583
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
