https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106977
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to ibuclaw from comment #9) > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8) > > + > > +/* NODE is a FUNCTION_DECL, VAR_DECL or RECORD_TYPE for the declaration > > SYM. > > + Set flags to reflect visibility that NODE will get in the object file. > > */ > > + > > +void > > +set_visibility_for_decl (tree node, Dsymbol *sym) > > > > hmmm.. should the call be "set_visibility_for_decl (decl, decl->csym); ? > > > > or should the signature of set_visibility_for_decl() be > > set_visibility_for_decl (Dsymbol *sym, tree node)? > > > > or maybe I misread the comment.... > I might be unclear, first parameter (NODE) is a tree *_DECL representation > for the second parameters (SYM) that is the associated front-end symbol. yeah but the definition of set_visibility_for_decl() is: +void +set_visibility_for_decl (tree node, Dsymbol *sym) which seems to be the opposite order (so if that's intended ... then the comment definitely needs to distinguish between D nodes and other cases)
