On 05/18/2015 04:52 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote:
On 6 May 2015 at 07:57, Jason Merrill <[email protected]> wrote:
On 05/06/2015 08:49 AM, Richard Smith wrote:
The reason we chose Ua rather than U was that the ABI suggests that U4blah
should demangle as 'blah', whereas we want something that demanglers know
should become '__attribute__((blah))'. I have no particular strong
feelings here.
Hmm, I don't think this is a useful distinction; what matters is the
calling convention, not whether it was written with a GNU __attribute, a
C++11 [[attribute]], a decl-specifier, or whatever.
The idea was to scope them, so Ua would be for attributes and we'd still
have room for Uc for calling conventions if we want some day.
Yes, but why? I don't see this scope as semantically meaningful, and
mangling is expressing the signature of a function, not trying to encode
the declaration syntax.
Jason
_______________________________________________
cxx-abi-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://sourcerytools.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cxx-abi-dev
