rsmith added a comment.

In D147655#4251042 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D147655#4251042>, @aaron.ballman 
wrote:
> 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.

This patch already extends `-fclang-abi-compat` to retain the old manglings so 
that users can stay on an old (broken) ABI if they need to. I don't think we 
need to do more than that for the concepts mangling changes.

>>> 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.

The corresponding (confirmed) GCC bug report that they don't implement these 
mangling rules yet is: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100825

This patch supersedes https://reviews.llvm.org/D126818 (apologies for the 
duplicated work, @erichkeane -- I didn't find that before I started working on 
this).


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