v.g.vassilev closed this revision.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
r305118.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33366
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
rsmith accepted this revision.
rsmith added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33366
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-c
teemperor updated this revision to Diff 101877.
teemperor added a comment.
- Just unconditionally calling `setHidden` now.
IIRC I had to put the conditions for the module builds because
setLocalOwningModule did trigger some tests/asserts, otherwise but the
setHidden works fine like this.
htt
rsmith added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExprCXX.cpp:2661-2669
+// If we're in local visibility mode, we reuse this allocation function
+// in all submodules of the current module. To make sure that the other
+// submodules can lookup this function, we u
teemperor updated this revision to Diff 99728.
teemperor edited the summary of this revision.
teemperor added a comment.
- Now unhiding/unowning the created functions like Richard suggested.
- Extended the test case to stress test the lookup with the new visibility
settings.
https://reviews.llv
rsmith added a comment.
This is supposed to be handled by `Sema::DeclareGlobalAllocationFunction`:
DeclContext::lookup_result R = GlobalCtx->lookup(Name);
for (DeclContext::lookup_iterator Alloc = R.begin(), AllocEnd = R.end();
Alloc != AllocEnd; ++Alloc) {
// Only look at non-temp
teemperor added a comment.
I'm not 100% sure if that's the right fix, but I didn't see a obvious way to
declare the new/delete outside the current submodule. Maybe Richard knows a
better way :)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33366
___
cfe-commits maili
teemperor created this revision.
In the current local-submodule-visibility mode, as soon as we discover a
virtual destructor, we declare on demand a global delete operator. However,
this causes that this delete operator is owned by the submodule which contains
said virtual destructor. This mean
