This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: C++ PATCH: Explicit instantiations of constructors

To: jason at redhat dot com
Subject: Re: C++ PATCH: Explicit instantiations of constructors
From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 16:40:50 -0800
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <20001122144457H.mitchell@codesourcery.com><u9wvdtwmqf.fsf@totally-fudged-out-message-id>

>>>>> "Jason" == Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> writes:

    >> * pt.c (do_decl_instantiate): Explicitly clone constructors and
    >> destructors that haven't already been cloned.

    Jason> I don't think this should be necessary.  Why aren't the
    Jason> clone decls generated automatically generated along with
    Jason> the cloned decl?

When you mean generated, what do you mean?  Instantiated, declared,
etc.?

We don't necessarily reach instantiate_decl, because we could have the
`extern' extension.  Doing the duplication in grokdeclarator seemed
ugly beyond belief.

I agree that I didn't find the fix to be the most pleasing thing
imaginable. :-)  I'd fully welcome a better solution!

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: C++ PATCH: Explicit instantiations of constructors
  - From: Jason Merrill

References:
- C++ PATCH: Explicit instantiations of constructors
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: C++ PATCH: Explicit instantiations of constructors
  - From: Jason Merrill

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]