Paul: is the PS4 toolchain's ABI based on that of a particular Clang release,
or is it a branch from trunk at some point? Or something else? (And which
release / revision?)
I am reminded that there are two parts to the ABI, the C++ part and the
platform part.
PS4's C++ ABI is whatever Clang 3.2
> On Aug 24, 2017, at 3:48 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On 24 August 2017 at 12:24, Paul Robinson via Phabricator via cfe-commits
> mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> probinson added a comment.
>
> Locally we have a couple different tactics for dealing with changes that we
> can't suppo
On 24 August 2017 at 12:24, Paul Robinson via Phabricator via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> probinson added a comment.
>
> Locally we have a couple different tactics for dealing with changes that
> we can't support. A more coherent approach would be great.
> For example we de
probinson added a comment.
Locally we have a couple different tactics for dealing with changes that we
can't support. A more coherent approach would be great.
For example we defined a new TargetCXXABI::Kind value that is mostly
GenericItaniumABI except where it isn't.
I personally did not do mo
rsmith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36501#836257, @rjmccall wrote:
> Yeah, I think having an internal C++ ABI version makes a lot more sense than
> having a million different flags. Is there a reason to expose this as a knob
> to users at all?
I don't see any reason anyone w
rjmccall added a comment.
Yeah, I think having an internal C++ ABI version makes a lot more sense than
having a million different flags. Is there a reason to expose this as a knob
to users at all?
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36501
__
rsmith created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: sanjoy.
This patch adds a flag `-fpass-indirect-ignore-move` that can be used to undo
the ABI change in r310401, reverting Clang to its prior C++ ABI for pass/return
by value of class types affected by that change.
This flag is enabled by
