[PATCH] [ms-cxxabi] Elide dtor access checks for pass-by-val objects in callees

[Reid Kleckner]

I also don't like having to emit LLVM IR for this program:

class A { ~A() {} };
struct B : A { };
void foo(B b) { }

Any call to foo would be an error, but if we just turn off the access
check, we'll generate code for B's deleted dtor, which is really, really
weird.


On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:38 PM, David Majnemer <david.majnemer at gmail.com>wrote:

> I don't think we should elide these checks.  This would lead us to behave
> differently than MSVC inside of SFINAE contexts.
>
> Sent from my phone.
>
>
> On Wednesday, December 18, 2013, Hans Wennborg wrote:
>
>>
>>   The problem is that MarkFunctionReferenced does access checks as it
>> marks functions as referenced. This makes perfect sense, except here when
>> we want to be able to call the dtor but bypass the access check.
>>
>>   Richard: it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this. Is the
>> added plumbing of this boolean variable through the various functions an
>> acceptable approach? Would it be ok to avoid that with some mechanism to
>> "trap" access check errors (maybe a flag on Sema)? Or is it not worth the
>> hassle to change this?
>>
>> http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2409
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-commits mailing list
>> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20131218/a06822b7/attachment.html>