Implement a demangleable strong ownership symbol mangling.
* The original module symbol mangling scheme turned out to be
undemangleable.
* The hoped-for C++17 compatibility of weak ownership turns out to be
fragile
* C++20 now has better ways of controlling C++17 compatibility
The issue is captured on the ABI list at:
https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/134
GCC implements this new mangling.
The old mangling is unceremoniously dropped. No backwards
compatibility, no deprectated old-mangling flag. It was always
labelled experimental. (Old and new manglings cannot be confused.)
Reviewed By: dblaikie
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122256
The existing module symbol mangling scheme turns out to be
undemangleable. It is also desirable to switch to the
strong-ownership model as the hoped-for C++17 compatibility turns out
to be fragile, and we also now have a better way of controlling that.
The issue is captured on the ABI list at:
https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/134
A document describing the issues and new mangling is at:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qQjqptzOFT_lfXH8L6-iD9nCRi34wjft/view
This patch is the code-generation part. I have a demangler too, but
that patch is based on some to-be-landed refactoring of the demangler.
The old mangling is unceremoniously dropped. No backwards
compatibility, no deprectated old-mangling flag. It was always
labelled experimental. (Old and new manglings cannot be confused.)
Reviewed By: ChuanqiXu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118352
The following was found by a customer and is accepted by the other primary
C++ compilers, but fails to compile in Clang:
namespace sss {
double foo(int, double);
template <class T>
T foo(T); // note: target of using declaration
} // namespace sss
namespace oad {
void foo();
}
namespace oad {
using ::sss::foo;
}
namespace sss {
using oad::foo; // note: using declaration
}
namespace sss {
double foo(int, double) { return 0; }
template <class T>
T foo(T t) { // error: declaration conflicts with target of using
return t;
}
} // namespace sss
I believe the issue is that MergeFunctionDecl() was calling
checkUsingShadowRedecl() but only considering a FunctionDecl as a
possible shadow and not FunctionTemplateDecl. The changes in this patch
largely mirror how variable declarations were being handled by also
catching FunctionTemplateDecl.
The tests that failed on a windows host have been fixed.
Original message:
Start setting dso_local for COFF.
With this there are still some GVs where we don't set dso_local
because setGVProperties is never called. I intend to fix that in
followup commits. This is just the bare minimum to teach
shouldAssumeDSOLocal what it should do for COFF.
llvm-svn: 325940
When declaring an entity in the "purview" of a module, it's never a
redeclaration of an entity in the purview of a default module or in no module
("in the global module"). Don't consider those other declarations as possible
redeclaration targets if they're not visible, and reject any cases where we
pick a prior visible declaration that violates this rule.
This reinstates r315251 and r315256, reverted in r315309 and r315308
respectively, tweaked to avoid triggering a linkage calculation when declaring
implicit special members (this exposed our pre-existing issue with typedef
names for linkage changing the linkage of types whose linkage has already been
computed and cached in more cases). A testcase for that regression has been
added in r315366.
llvm-svn: 315379
When declaring an entity in the "purview" of a module, it's never a
redeclaration of an entity in the purview of a default module or in no module
("in the global module"). Don't consider those other declarations as possible
redeclaration targets if they're not visible, and reject any cases where we
pick a prior visible declaration that violates this rule.
llvm-svn: 315251
This follows the scheme agreed with Nathan Sidwell, which can be found here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cxx-modules?action=AttachFile
This will be proposed to the itanium-cxx-abi list once we have some experience
with how well it works; the ABI for this TS should be considered unstable until
it is part of the Itanium C++ ABI.
llvm-svn: 312467
In addition to the formal linkage rules, the Modules TS includes cases where
internal-linkage symbols within a module interface unit can be referenced from
outside the module via exported inline functions / templates. We give such
declarations "module-internal linkage", which is formally internal linkage, but
results in an externally-visible symbol.
llvm-svn: 307434
Nathan Sidwell