[llvm-commits] [llvm] r111684 - in /llvm/trunk: docs/LangRef.html include/llvm-c/Core.h include/llvm/GlobalValue.h lib/AsmParser/LLLexer.cpp lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp lib/AsmParser/LLToken.h lib/Bitcode/Reader/BitcodeReader.cpp lib/Bitcode/Write

[Chris Lattner]

On Aug 22, 2010, at 3:43 PM, Bill Wendling wrote:

> On Aug 20, 2010, at 3:14 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
> 
>>> Create the new linker type "linker_private_weak_def_auto".
>> Maybe we should put a temporary veto on adding new linkage types?
>> Or at least such patches deserve some discussion?
>> Why is it not possible to emulate the behavior with some current
>> linkage type and e.g. visibility setting?
>> 
> Possibly? Though they do have differing semantics, so it could get confusing. How about this radical idea:
> 
> We have a "linker_private" linkage type. Then there could be a few sub-linkage types: default, weak, weak_def_auto, some-other-crazy-sub-type, etc. Does that sound vaguely plausible?

This doesn't seem like a very well formed proposal.  It's hard to comment on it without substantially more details.

-Chris