[Lldb-commits] [Diffusion] rL234178: We have an issue where if you use a C function right now that has no prototype…

[Siva Chandra]

I am still doing my "homework" around this patch. Once I am clear as
what exactly is happening, I will send it out to the clang list if it
is still relevant.

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Greg Clayton <clayborg at gmail.com> wrote:
> Siva: You will need to forward this to the clang lists to see if this is a correct fix.
>
>> On Apr 9, 2015, at 11:16 AM, Siva Chandra <sivachandra at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I do not have anything concrete. However, the attached patch for clang
>> fixes both the failing tests. I do not know if my fix is correct. Even
>> if it is, we should find a way to "workaround" in LLDB so that older
>> versions of clang are OK. I have some ideas for this, will share when
>> I am able to put them into concrete words.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Siva Chandra
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Tamas Berghammer
>> <tberghammer at google.com> wrote:
>>> +sivachandra
>>>
>>> Siva is looking into this issue. The problem is that lldb looks for a
>>> mangled name _ZN3fooC1Ei while the object file (compiled by clang) contains
>>> it with _ZN3fooC2Ei. The difference is that the first one belongs to the
>>> complete constructor and the second one belongs to the base constructor.