[PATCH] D74015: [AIX][Frontend] C++ ABI customizations for AIX boilerplate

[Chris Bowler via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

cebowleratibm added a comment.

>From my perspective, the only issue holding this up is settling on the name.  I'd like to hammer that out and get this committed.



================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/TargetCXXABI.h:116
+    ///   - static initialization is adjusted to use sinit and sterm functions;
+    XL_Clang,
+
----------------
cebowleratibm wrote:
> sfertile wrote:
> > Xiangling_L wrote:
> > > daltenty wrote:
> > > > Why the underscore in the name? This is a bit inconsistent with both the LLVM naming convention here and the name as it appears in other sources.
> > > There are various AIX ABI. So to distinguish the one we are implementing, we choose `XL` and `Clang` as two parts of the abi name. 
> > > `XL` - not g++;
> > > `Clang` - it's a  ABI implemented in Clang;
> > > 
> > > And also `XLClang` is misleading because it represents our AIX XL C/C++ compiler itself externally.
> > So do we need the 'Clang' part in the name? For example the ABI below is not `Microsoft_Clang`. Or is the `_Clang` differentiating between multiple XL ABIs?
> I suspect the concern is that "XL" ABI is ambiguious between legacy xlC and xlclang++.  The two differ at the C++11 language level so perhaps it makes sense to have "XLC++11"?  (and theoretically just "XL" if we ever decide xlC)
Another suggestion: "IBMXL" or "IBMXLC++11"


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D74015/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D74015