aaron.ballman added a comment.

In D147655#4250922 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D147655#4250922>, @royjacobson 
wrote:

> In D147655#4250056 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D147655#4250056>, @rsmith wrote:
>
>> There has not been any stable ABI from any compiler targeting the Itanium 
>> C++ ABI for constrained templates prior to this change. I don't think we 
>> need to worry too much about people using unfinished compiler features being 
>> broken when those features are finished.
>
> The ABI has been stable for quite some time and people have been using 
> concepts with it for almost 3 years now. I'm not sure we can still break ABI 
> this easily. But then, I also have no data to say we can't.

We've never claimed full support for concepts, so those folks would be relying 
on an unstable ABI. However, if it turns out this causes significant pain in 
practice, perhaps we could use ABI tags to give folks the older ABI? I'd prefer 
to avoid that in this case given that the feature isn't yet fully supported (I 
don't like the idea of setting a precedent for relying on the ABI of incomplete 
features in general), but concepts is a sufficiently important use case that I 
could imagine doing it as a one-off if needed.

>> The ABI proposals haven't been accepted yet; I'm not intending to land this 
>> change until the proposals have reached consensus in the Itanium C++ ABI 
>> group.
>
> Thanks for clarifying!




Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D147655/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D147655

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to