Function signatures in extern "C".
Jonathan Wakely
jwakely.gcc@gmail.com
Mon Sep 7 10:29:52 GMT 2020
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.
More information about the Gcc
mailing list