On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 10/28/2013 06:12 PM, Dehao Chen wrote: >> >> ping... > > > Sorry for the slow response. > > If we're actually emitting the name now, we need to give it a name different > from the complete constructor. I suppose it makes sense to go with C4/D4 as > in the decloning patch,
Shall we do it in a separate patch? And I suppose binutils also need to be updated for C4/D4? Thanks, Dehao > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-11/txt00046.txt > > (which I've been meaning to revisit before the end of stage 1). > > Jason >
