This is the mail archive of the 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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: PATCH: Add ifunc attribute

> > Why wouldn't Roland's proposal work with C++?
> I am not sure it will work for C++, especially for member functions.

That isn't actually an answer to the question, you know.
Why wouldn't it?

I had not thought about name mangling before, but I don't see a special
problem if you treat it in what seems to me the obvious way.  With:

__typeof (foo) *foo_finder (void) __attribute__ ((ifunc ("foo")));

The mangling of "foo" goes with the type of "foo".  Either you could say
that a foo prototype must be in scope, and it literally uses the type of
"foo", but that is probably a confusing definition given overloading.
With C++ overloading you can't actually use __typeof (foo), of course.

void foo (int);
void foo (float);
void (*foo_int_finder (void)) (int) __attribute__ ((ifunc ("foo")));
void (*foo_float_finder (void)) (float) __attribute__ ((ifunc ("foo")));

So what you say is that the function type to which *_finder's return type
is a pointer, is the type of "foo" for name-mangling purposes.  Same with
s/foo/someclass::foo/ for a member function.  


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