dblaikie added a comment. In D119409#3332476 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D119409#3332476>, @urnathan wrote:
> In D119409#3332313 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D119409#3332313>, @dblaikie > wrote: > >> > > That's interesting data. I guess one could emit the out-of-line bodies into > their own sections, and then rely on linker section GC to elide them in the > static link. Yep, that's what I did - they were emitted weak_odr (weak linkage in ELF semantics) - but I was mostly interested in the object size reduction in fully statically linked binaries, so producing redundant or unused descriptions was hurting that goal. (& yeah, shared library issues are a whole other bucket I didn't even consider/evaluate) > Richard and I discussed taking advantage of this kind of new home location, > certainly for key-less polymorphic classes. I was against it as it was more > work :) Blame me. Ah, possibly. ( https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20170710/198206.html - seems I've had this question for a while (pinged this thread a few times over the years) & never got a clear answer from Richard at least... (@rsmith ?) - but I vaguely remember discussing it, maybe in some more ad-hoc conversation that didn't make it onto the mailing list... ) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D119409/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D119409 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
