On 11 June 2012 17:58, Johannes Pfau <nos...@example.com> wrote: > Am Mon, 4 Jun 2012 07:31:59 -0400 > schrieb Matthew Caron <matt.ca...@redlion.net>: > >> Judging by: >> >> https://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/issue/120/fsection-anchors-broken-on-arm >> >> (specifically >> https://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/issue/120/fsection-anchors-broken-on-arm#comment-686378), >> I thought that was fixed. > > No, that's only a partial fix. There's at least one other issue with > -fsection-anchors which isn't fixed by that patch. Also the patch > hasn't been committed yet IIRC. > > I had another look at the issue today though and posted some new > information. Maybe that's enough for Iain to fix it?
There are two things under my general consensus for this: 1. would be to re-implement dfrontend/todt.c entirely, so that we produce GCC trees directly from the toDt routines, rather than the dmd's intermediate backend representation and later blindly converting to GCC after all information about the type size is finalised. 2. would be to review the current implementation of how we record inheritance in classes and fix it up where possible to utilise the already existing macros in place to hold information about type inheritance and basetypes for the backend to better understand what information we are sending it. Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
