AaronBallman wrote: > Thanks for review @efriedma-quic . I've been thinking though, that this > change is kind of ABI breaking. Example: if library A was compiled with clang > 20, library B compiled with clang 21 (or any release where this patch ends > up, I don't really understand current llvm release model). class B is > implemented in library A, so its destructor doesn't call operator ::delete, > then an object of class B is deleted via ::delete in library B, so the > callsite doesn't call ::delete because of this patch. So there will be no > ::delete call at all. I do realize that is probably a corner case limited to > windows, but still, should that go through breaking changes process? cc > @AaronBallman
I think this is a case where we'd call out the breaking change in the release notes and if anyone needed the older ABI, we'd use ABI version tags for it at that point. CC @llvm/clang-vendors for awareness for the potentially breaking changes. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139566 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
