[llvm] r198438 - Make the llvm mangler depend only on DataLayout.

[Reid Kleckner]

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Rafael Espíndola
> <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> +``m:<mangling>``
> >>> +   If prerest, specifies that llvm names are mangled in the output.
> The
> >>> +   options are
> >>> +   * ``e``: ELF mangling: Private symbols get a ``.L`` prefix.
> >>> +   * ``m``: Mips mangling: Private symbols get a ``$`` prefix.
> >>> +   * ``o``: Mach-O mangling: Private symbols get ``L`` prefix. Other
> >>> +    symbols get a ``_`` prefix.
> >>> +   * ``c``:  COFF prefix:  Similar to Mach-O, but stdcall and fastcall
> >>> +  functions also get a sufiix based on the frame size.
> >>
> >>
> >> Is this truly COFF or COFF/PE?  PE has diverged significantly from
> COFF, and
> >> I think it would be nice to indicate that this is PE mangling (unless Im
> >> mistaken and this is meant to be specifically COFF).  I may be mistaken
> >> here, but I believe that the stdcall/fastcall mangling is PE specific.
> >
> > I am not sure. It is the mangling we do 32 bit windows targets (mingw
> > and cygwin included). Do you think it would be better to give it some
> > other name? Aaron, any opinion on this?
>
> I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, but David or Reid
> may have more insights on the topic.
>

I don't think LLVM supports emitting COFF for non-Windows-like platforms,
so it would be OK to use 'c' as the code for the mangling.  We could use
'w' for Windows instead of 'c' if we wanted to be more specific.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140108/1ee72c0a/attachment.html>