[cfe-dev] [libc++] A proposal for getting rid of __always_inline__ in _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY

Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via cfe-dev cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Jul 12 08:26:20 PDT 2018



> On Jul 10, 2018, at 12:13, Louis Dionne via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jul 10, 2018, at 10:07, Eric Fiselier <eric at efcs.ca <mailto:eric at efcs.ca>> wrote:
>> 
>> I like the idea of `_LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI`, and I think the first step you proposed sounds reasonable.
>> 
>> On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Louis Dionne via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> 1. Everything that is ABI stable is marked with a visibility macro like today (no change here).
>> 2. Everything that is marked with `_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY` today is marked with a new `_LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI` macro instead. This macro can be defined to `__attribute__((__visibility__("hidden")))` or to `__attribute__((__visibility__("hidden"),internal_linkage))` depending on whether we want to support only use case (1), or both use cases (1) and (2), respectively.
>> 
>> By ABI stable do you mean exported from the libc++ dylib, or all non-reserved names provided by the library? (2) suggests the former, since entities like std::sort are marked with _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY.
>> Any entity which a user can reasonably expect to externally instantiate cannot be part of the “hidden ABI”, since marking it with internal linkage will cause linkage failures.
>> 
>> I think we'll be limited to applying `_LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI` to names which are (A) reserved and (B) cannot be externally instantiated as a member of a class.
> 
> I mean exported from the libc++ dylib.

IIRC, parts of std::vector (like __push_back_slow_path) are also ABI stable.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20180712/55553de7/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the cfe-dev mailing list