MuellerMP wrote: > This case(new and delete object) I think we should probably fix the EH > numbering algorithm, This does not conflict with This PR
I argued throughout this PR that "fixing this in EH numbering" is not optimal since mixing SEH with C++ unwinding is generally not allowed in MS C++ and only seems to be supported by Borland C++. In the latter case I do not know how unwinding is generated (e.g. which personality is chosen). What i noticed though: even if we mark the dtor as virtual for the delete sample there is still a scope begin+end. That is also true if we delete the delete call and just have the ctor present. Since this is legal in MS C++ I guess one can argue that we should indeed respect that in the numbering algo. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/172287 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
