From: "gprocida+abigail at google dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: libabigail@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug default/27014] New: Ensure XML writer handles forward-declared enums as it does classes and unions
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 12:16:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-27014-9487@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27014
Bug ID: 27014
Summary: Ensure XML writer handles forward-declared enums as it
does classes and unions
Product: libabigail
Version: unspecified
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: default
Assignee: dodji at redhat dot com
Reporter: gprocida+abigail at google dot com
CC: libabigail at sourceware dot org
Target Milestone: ---
With regard to
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=libabigail.git;a=commit;h=35162bd4e362267502016c564edfe95ba99c514c
I posed the question:
Do we need *look_through_decl_only_enum* somewhere as well?
Dodji replied:
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.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
reply other threads:[~2020-12-04 12:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=bug-27014-9487@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
--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).