[cfe-dev] [RFC] C++17 hardware constructive / destructive interference size

[James Y Knight via cfe-dev]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 4:35 PM Hal Finkel via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On 05/25/2018 02:40 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>
> On 25 May 2018 at 12:15, Hal Finkel via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, to define structure layouts they need to be constant.
>>
>> The best solution I've thought of is to extend the abi_tag support to
>> force the mangling of interfaces depending on values of these constructs to
>> be different.
>>
>
> abi_tag is not an effective way of maintaining ABI, because it needs to be
> "viral" / transitive, and can't be (at least, not without huge developer
> effort).
>
>
> Interesting. I had thought that abi_tag was transitive.
>
> It occurs to me that Transitive ABI Infection Mechanism (TAIM) has a
> reasonable acronym. :-) - I suspect that's what we need in this case.
>

That was the original idea, but halfway through implementing it, they
realized that forward declarations are a thing.

Thus it is unfortunately not possible to infer the ABI-name of a struct
from its contents.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20180525/1522a0c0/attachment.html>