Reid - is this intended fallout? (seems plausible, but just checking) Is MinGW a good analogy for any of this work? (does it produce DWARF? Does it use the Windows ABI? Does it emit Calling Convention attributes?)
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 3:06 AM, NAKAMURA Takumi via cfe-commits < cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Author: chapuni > Date: Thu Jun 9 05:06:13 2016 > New Revision: 272253 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=272253&view=rev > Log: > clang/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-method.cpp: Tweak for thiscall, for > targeting Win32 x86. > > Modified: > cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-method.cpp > > Modified: cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-method.cpp > URL: > http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-method.cpp?rev=272253&r1=272252&r2=272253&view=diff > > ============================================================================== > --- cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-method.cpp (original) > +++ cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-method.cpp Thu Jun 9 05:06:13 > 2016 > @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ > // CHECK-SAME: DIFlagArtificial > // CHECK: !DIDerivedType(tag: DW_TAG_ptr_to_member_type > // CHECK: !DIDerivedType(tag: DW_TAG_ptr_to_member_type, baseType: > ![[MEMFUNTYPE:[0-9]+]] > -// CHECK: ![[MEMFUNTYPE]] = !DISubroutineType(types: > ![[MEMFUNARGS:[0-9]+]]) > +// CHECK: ![[MEMFUNTYPE]] = !DISubroutineType({{(cc: > DW_CC_BORLAND_thiscall, )?}}types: ![[MEMFUNARGS:[0-9]+]]) > // CHECK: ![[MEMFUNARGS]] = {{.*}}, ![[THISTYPE]], > // CHECK: !DILocalVariable(name: "this", arg: 1 > // CHECK: !DILocalVariable(arg: 2 > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
