public inbox for libabigail@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com>
To: Giuliano Procida via Libabigail <libabigail@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] writer: Emit definitions of declarations when they are present
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:56:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a6uy6dp9.fsf@seketeli.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGvU0HkioQbtR0UnwhwLWrB7WThuRCNfU=OkTsGFXxkog4R9hA@mail.gmail.com> (Giuliano Procida via Libabigail's message of "Mon, 30 Nov 2020 13:49:46 +0000")

Hello Giuliano,

Giuliano Procida via Libabigail <libabigail@sourceware.org> a écrit:

> Hi Dodji.
>
> I had a quick scan through this.
>
> Do we need  look_through_decl_only_enum  somewhere as well?

Good question.

Right now, when the equals function compares enums, it doens't look
through the declaration to get the definition of the enum.  It will only
use the decl-only part of the enum in the comparison, even if the enum
decl was fully resolved to its definition.  For classes (and unions)
however, equals always looks through the declaration.

So, at ABIXML write time, if we happen to not saving the definition and
we only save the decl-only part, the comparison should be done between
the decl-only part of both enums (the one in the IR coming from the
binary and the one from the IR coming from the ABIXML) being compared.
So it shouldn't yield an ABI change.

Now, the behaviour for classes/unions can be said to be inconsistent with
the behaviour for enums.  So we might indeed want to always serialize
the definition of declarations of enum if we have it.

But then, we'd need update at least the 'equals' comparison function
accordingly, I believe.

But as this is like getting into the "feature" territory (kind of) I'd
wait for releasing 1.8 before doing this.

What do you think?

[...]

Cheers,


-- 
		Dodji


  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-30 15:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-27 16:56 [PATCH 0/6] Fix subtle ABI artifact representation issues Dodji Seketeli
2020-11-27 17:03 ` [PATCH 1/6] writer: Emit definitions of declarations when they are present Dodji Seketeli
2020-11-30 13:49   ` Giuliano Procida
2020-11-30 15:56     ` Dodji Seketeli [this message]
2020-11-30 18:15       ` Giuliano Procida
2020-12-01  9:51         ` Dodji Seketeli
2020-11-27 17:05 ` [PATCH 2/6] ir: Introduce internal pretty representation for anonymous classes Dodji Seketeli
2020-11-27 17:06 ` [PATCH 3/6] reader: Don't lose anonymous-ness of decl-only classes Dodji Seketeli
2020-11-27 17:07 ` [PATCH 4/6] dwarf-reader: Avoid having several functions with the same symbol Dodji Seketeli
2020-11-27 17:08 ` [PATCH 5/6] abidw: make --abidiff report any change against own ABIXML Dodji Seketeli
2020-11-27 17:08 ` [PATCH 6/6] abipkgdiff: make --self-check to fail on " Dodji Seketeli

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=87a6uy6dp9.fsf@seketeli.org \
    --to=dodji@redhat.com \
    --cc=libabigail@sourceware.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).