[PATCH] D96832: [Clang][Attributes] Allow not_tail_called attribute to be applied to virtual function.

[Akira Hatanaka via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ahatanak added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td:4087-4088
 
-Marking virtual functions as ``not_tail_called`` is an error:
+Marking virtual functions as ``not_tail_called`` will not have effect on the
+overriding functions of derived classes:
 
----------------
Quuxplusone wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > 
> /will not have effect/will have no effect/
> However, this phrasing is easy to interpret the wrong way around: actually marking a (base-class) virtual function //will// affect overriding functions in derived classes! You meant that marking the //overrider// wouldn't retroactively affect the //overridden// function from the base class.
> I think the correct explanation would be more like this:
> 
>     Generally, marking an overriding virtual function as ``not_tail_called`` is
>     not useful, because this attribute is a property of the static type. Calls
>     made through a pointer or reference to the base class type will respect
>     the ``no_tail_called`` attribute of the base class's member function,
>     regardless of the runtime destination of the call.
> 
> I think it'd also be correct and helpful to add:
> 
>     Similarly, calls made through a function pointer will respect the
>     ``no_tail_called`` attribute of the function pointer, not of its
>     runtime destination.
> 
> (I admit this is mildly redundant with the `foo2` example above.)
> calls made through a function pointer will respect the ``no_tail_called`` attribute of the function pointer

But function pointers currently can't be annotated with `no_tail_called`, right?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D96832/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D96832