[cfe-dev] Constructor & destructor name mangling for MS ABI.

[r4start]

On 01/12/2011 09:49, Michael Spencer wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 1:42 AM, r4start<r4start at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Here is a patch with test cases.
>>
>>   - Dmitry.
> This patch breaks with the following test case:
>
> struct A {
>    A();
> };
>
> A::A() {}
Yes, I know about this problem.
> The reason is that the Itanium ABI has different manglings for the
> different types of constructors (base, complete, and some other weird
> one). This patch mangles both the same way, thus later in the code
> clang gets a GlobalAlias when it expects a Function.
>
> I have looked into properly handling this, but it requires changing
> how CGCXX generates constructors. It also requires that we figure out
> exactly how the ms-abi handles base vs complete constructors. I
> believe that when a base constructor is possibly different from the
> complete constructor, you add an argument to the constructor which
> specifies if it should construct everything.
>
> - Michael Spencer
At now in my code I just have a stub for this.
I treat all constructors as ctor base(same for destructors) for MS ABI.
If you need I can publish these stubs for you, but I think these stubs 
shouldn't be in clang tree.
I will start resolve this problem only after implementing RTTI for 
MS(maybe not full, but working on some test cases).

  - Dmitry.