On Mon, 4 Mar 2019 at 17:37, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 8:41 AM Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 02:58, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > >
> > > A type in an anonymous namespace can never be merged with one from
> > > another translation unit, so a member of such
On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 8:41 AM Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 02:58, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >
> > A type in an anonymous namespace can never be merged with one from
> > another translation unit, so a member of such a type is always its own
> > prevailing decl.
> >
> > I don't rea
On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 02:58, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> A type in an anonymous namespace can never be merged with one from
> another translation unit, so a member of such a type is always its own
> prevailing decl.
>
> I don't really understand the LTO concept of prevailing decl, or why we don't
>
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 10:53 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 2:58 AM Jason Merrill wrote:
> >
> > A type in an anonymous namespace can never be merged with one from
> > another translation unit, so a member of such a type is always its own
> > prevailing decl.
> >
> > I don't
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 2:58 AM Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> A type in an anonymous namespace can never be merged with one from
> another translation unit, so a member of such a type is always its own
> prevailing decl.
>
> I don't really understand the LTO concept of prevailing decl, or why we don't
A type in an anonymous namespace can never be merged with one from
another translation unit, so a member of such a type is always its own
prevailing decl.
I don't really understand the LTO concept of prevailing decl, or why we don't
get here if the destructor is defined, but this seems reasonable
