================
@@ -1035,28 +1035,38 @@ class DestroyField final : public EHScopeStack::Cleanup
{
/// destructors on members and base classes in reverse order of their
/// construction.
///
-/// For a deleting destructor, this also handles the case where a destroying
-/// operator delete completely overrides the definition.
+/// For a deleting destructor, this instead pushes the cleanup that calls
+/// operator delete and delegates to the complete destructor. It also handles
+/// the case where a destroying operator delete completely overrides the
+/// definition.
void CIRGenFunction::enterDtorCleanups(const CXXDestructorDecl *dd,
CXXDtorType dtorType) {
assert((!dd->isTrivial() || dd->hasAttr<DLLExportAttr>()) &&
"Should not emit dtor epilogue for non-exported trivial dtor!");
- // The deleting-destructor phase just needs to call the appropriate
- // operator delete that Sema picked up.
+ // The deleting-destructor phase calls the appropriate operator delete
+ // that Sema picked up.
if (dtorType == Dtor_Deleting) {
assert(dd->getOperatorDelete() &&
"operator delete missing - EnterDtorCleanups");
if (cxxStructorImplicitParamValue) {
cgm.errorNYI(dd->getSourceRange(), "deleting destructor with vtt");
+ } else if (dd->getOperatorDelete()->isDestroyingOperatorDelete()) {
+ const CXXRecordDecl *classDecl = dd->getParent();
+ emitDeleteCall(dd->getOperatorDelete(), loadThisForDtorDelete(*this, dd),
+ getContext().getCanonicalTagType(classDecl));
+ // A destroying operator delete destroys the object itself, so skip
+ // the delegation to the complete destructor below.
+ return;
} else {
- if (dd->getOperatorDelete()->isDestroyingOperatorDelete()) {
- cgm.errorNYI(dd->getSourceRange(),
- "deleting destructor with destroying operator delete");
- } else {
- ehStack.pushCleanup<CallDtorDelete>(NormalAndEHCleanup);
- }
+ ehStack.pushCleanup<CallDtorDelete>(NormalAndEHCleanup);
}
+
+ // Delegate to the complete destructor. operator delete runs when
+ // the caller's cleanup scope exits.
+ QualType thisTy = dd->getFunctionObjectParameterType();
+ emitCXXDestructorCall(dd, Dtor_Complete, /*forVirtualBase=*/false,
----------------
andykaylor wrote:
Basically, while explaining why I didn't want to refactor it in the way you
suggested, I convinced myself that I should. 😄
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/229606
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
