js added a comment. In D55869#1337707 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55869#1337707>, @dexonsmith wrote:
> In D55869#1337692 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55869#1337692>, @rjmccall wrote: > > > Okay. That's also presumably true for open-source runtimes that support > > ARC; tagging David Chisnall and Jonathan Schleifer to get their input. > > > `shouldUseARCFunctionsForRetainRelease()` returns `false` for the other > runtimes. This seems like the right thing to do until/unless they add > support. > > Would make sense for the driver to additionally imply > `-fno-objc-convert-messages-to-runtime-calls` for other runtimes as a bigger > hammer? We could make it true here (happy to implement it), but the question about how this works with multiple root objects with different retain/release implementations remains. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D55869/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D55869 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
