[patch] Add support for putting constructors and destructos in explicit comdats

[Rafael Espíndola]

On 4 September 2014 14:41, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
> I don't like calling arrangeCXXDtorDeclaration from ctor-related functions.
> It looks like a typo. In the past I've used 'structor' as the generic term
> for ctors and dtors. You can see it in the Itanium mangling code, but I
> don't think it's very widely used. Does that seem like a better
> nomenclature? Then we would probably have StructorType, etc.

The attached patches uses the Structor nomenclature.

> I'm excited to finally have this functionality, though. :)

+1 :-)

Cheers,
Rafael
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: refactor.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 25483 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140904/1e854b09/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: comdat.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 25840 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140904/1e854b09/attachment-0001.bin>