[llvm-bugs] [Bug 47372] New: lambda static invoker does not inherit calling convention attribute from operator()
via llvm-bugs
llvm-bugs at lists.llvm.org
Mon Aug 31 16:06:38 PDT 2020
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47372
Bug ID: 47372
Summary: lambda static invoker does not inherit calling
convention attribute from operator()
Product: clang
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: C++11
Assignee: unassignedclangbugs at nondot.org
Reporter: richard-llvm at metafoo.co.uk
CC: blitzrakete at gmail.com, dgregor at apple.com,
erik.pilkington at gmail.com, llvm-bugs at lists.llvm.org,
richard-llvm at metafoo.co.uk
Testcase:
auto f(int a, int b) [[gnu::cdecl]] { return a + b; }
auto g(int a, int b) [[gnu::regcall]] { return a + b; }
auto p = [](int a, int b) [[gnu::cdecl]] { return a + b; };
auto q = [](int a, int b) [[gnu::regcall]] { return a + b; };
auto x = &decltype(p)::operator();
auto y = &decltype(q)::operator();
void *z[2] = {&x, &y};
auto *static_x = +p;
auto *static_y = +q;
https://godbolt.org/z/ss68Y6
... uses regcall calling convention for g and q's operator(), but not for q's
static invoker. Indeed,
int (*static_x_regcall)(int, int) [[gnu::regcall]] = q;
... is rejected because there's no conversion function to a function pointer
with the right calling convention.
We should decide whether we want an explicit calling convention attribute on
the operator() to carry through to the conversion function. (If we fix PR38285
first, this should only affect the "default" calling convention used by (eg)
decaying a lambda to a function pointer with unary + or *.)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-bugs/attachments/20200831/d89f6caa/attachment.html>
More information about the llvm-bugs
mailing list