[cfe-dev] Constructor & destructor name mangling for MS ABI.

[r4start]

On 01/12/2011 13:58, Michael Spencer wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:28 AM, r4start<r4start at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 01/12/2011 09:49, Michael Spencer wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 1:42 AM, r4start<r4start at gmail.com>    wrote:
>>>> Here is a patch with test cases.
>>>>
>>>>   - Dmitry.
>>> This patch breaks with the following test case:
>>>
>>> struct A {
>>>    A();
>>> };
>>>
>>> A::A() {}
>> Yes, I know about this problem.
>>> The reason is that the Itanium ABI has different manglings for the
>>> different types of constructors (base, complete, and some other weird
>>> one). This patch mangles both the same way, thus later in the code
>>> clang gets a GlobalAlias when it expects a Function.
>>>
>>> I have looked into properly handling this, but it requires changing
>>> how CGCXX generates constructors. It also requires that we figure out
>>> exactly how the ms-abi handles base vs complete constructors. I
>>> believe that when a base constructor is possibly different from the
>>> complete constructor, you add an argument to the constructor which
>>> specifies if it should construct everything.
>>>
>>> - Michael Spencer
>> At now in my code I just have a stub for this.
>> I treat all constructors as ctor base(same for destructors) for MS ABI.
>> If you need I can publish these stubs for you, but I think these stubs
>> shouldn't be in clang tree.
>> I will start resolve this problem only after implementing RTTI for MS(maybe
>> not full, but working on some test cases).
>>
>>   - Dmitry.
> I'd like the stubs, but this patch is fine to commit as is.
>
> committed as r145581.
>
> - Michael Spencer
This patch contains 2 simple stubs as you can see.

  - Dmitry.