ABataev added a comment. In D71241#1782700 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71241#1782700>, @hfinkel wrote:
> In D71241#1782668 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71241#1782668>, @ABataev wrote: > > > > > > ... > > >> While we talk a lot about what you think is bad about this solution it > >> seems we ignore the problems in the current one. Let me summarize a few: > >> > >> - Take https://godbolt.org/z/XCjQUA where the wrong function is called in > >> the target region (because the "hack" to inject code in the wrong > >> definition is not applicable). > > > > No time for it, just short answers. No definition for the variant - no > > definition for the base. > > Are the variants not permitted to be external functions? Allowed, of course. But the alias/body will be emitted only if variant function is defined. Everyhing else is going to be resolved by the linker. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71241/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71241 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
