From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Iain Sandoe <iain@sandoe.co.uk>,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Nathan Sidwell <nathan@acm.org>,
Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Function signatures in extern "C".
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 11:29:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAH6eHdRiW4YnhGBjjKTvm9_8nGf=VTePd04CFK=cxud5CKv3hQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200907093409.GE18149@tucnak>
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020, 10:34 Jakub Jelinek, <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 10:27:13AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 09:18, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> > >
> > > Perhaps the PR should be reopened with “accepts invalid”?
> >
> > My impression from the PR is that the reporter was using a different
> > ABI, where the name isn't reserved. Maybe the testcase should only be
> > accepted with -fno-threadsafe-statics or -ffreestanding or something
> > to say "I'm doing things differently".
> >
> > Or we could just say that G++ reserves the Itanium ABI names
> > unconditionally, even if it doesn't need to use them, in which case it
> > would be accepts-invalid.
>
> All identifiers starting with two underscores are reserved for the
> implementation already.
>
Doh, of course. So they'd have to be using some other unsupported ABI which
uses that name for a different meaning, which seems like a badly designed
ABI given that the "__cxa_" prefix is already claimed by the Itanium ABI.
So we shouldn't ICE but any other outcome for that testcase would be ok,
including rejecting it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-07 10:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-06 15:22 Iain Sandoe
2020-09-06 20:23 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-09-06 20:43 ` Iain Sandoe
2020-09-06 23:05 ` Nathan Sidwell
2020-09-07 8:16 ` Iain Sandoe
2020-09-07 9:27 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-09-07 9:34 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-09-07 10:29 ` Jonathan Wakely [this message]
2020-09-10 7:58 ` Florian Weimer
2020-09-07 9:38 ` Iain Sandoe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAH6eHdRiW4YnhGBjjKTvm9_8nGf=VTePd04CFK=cxud5CKv3hQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jwakely.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=iain@sandoe.co.uk \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=nathan@acm.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).