mwyman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td:2251-2256
+def ObjCDirectVisible : Attr {
+ let Spellings = [Clang<"objc_direct_visible">];
+ let Subjects = SubjectList<[ObjCMethod], ErrorDiag>;
+ let LangOpts = [ObjC];
+ let Documentation = [ObjCDirectVisibleDocs];
+}
----------------
plotfi wrote:
> plotfi wrote:
> > mwyman wrote:
> > > Should this inherit `ObjCDirect`, to include both objc_direct and the
> > > visibility aspect? I don't see any reason we would want to add
> > > `objc_direct_visible` without also having `objc_direct`, so why make
> > > developers add both?
> > >
> > > As an alternative, would it make sense to allow adding
> > > `__attribute__((visibility("default")))` on direct methods?
> > >
> > > Also, it doesn't seem like this allows making `@property`s visible, so
> > > should there be a similar attribute for properties?
> > I'd prefer to do `@property`s in a separate commit, but I suppose you are
> > thinking like a `objc_direct_members_visible` attribute? I think I can add
> > that in a subsequent commit.
> >
> > I took a look at how to make things inherit and I think the most
> > straightforward way is to have `handleObjCDirectVisibleAttr` set the
> > objc_direct attribute if it is not set already.
> >
> > As for `__attribute__((visibility("default")))` I think the trouble lies in
> > what we want the default visibility behavior for objc methods to be and if
> > we want the behavior to be controlled by `-fvisibility=`. I tried going by
> > attribute visibility before and had some trouble too (I forget exactly what
> > though).
> >
> >
> I gave visibility a try and it seems that the trouble is everything is
> visible by default where for objc methods we want them hidden by default. I
> think I would rather add a separate attr for this than add an additional
> non-conformant visibility mode.
Re: visibility, I wonder if it might make sense to create an optional enum
argument on the `objc_direct` and `objc_direct_members` attributes, with either
`hidden` or `visible` values (and presumably `hidden` being default); if we
have an `objc_direct_members_visible`-like attribute, would there be cases
where someone may wish to hide individual members?
This is quite possibly over-thinking the issue, but it also then avoids having
an entirely new pair of method attributes. It doesn't solve the `@property`
attributes, which don't have arguments, but it may be unavoidable to add a
completely new attribute for that.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D86049/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D86049
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
