[patch] Change the .ll syntax for comdats and add a syntactic sugar

[Duncan P. N. Exon Smith]

> On 2015 Jan 5, at 17:33, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 5 January 2015 at 18:39, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I haven't been following the discussion that led to seeking a more compact
>> syntax, but personally I think that adding sugar to the .ll syntax is not a
>> good idea. The reason is that I generally find it more difficult to remember
>> how to expand various infrequently-used/encountered sugars while reading
>> than to wade through verbosity while reading.
> 
> It started with a patch to clang to make all comdats explicit. The
> concern for making the syntax a bit more compact was that it would be
> very common to have a comdat that is used only in one global. C++
> inline functions will be one such case.

I think the proposal (with sugar) is reasonable: only the duplicated name
is dropped, so I think it's clear which comdat it's going to.  I suspect
dropping the duplicated name will aid (rather than hinder) readability.