On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Anton Lokhmotov <Anton.Lokhmotov at
arm.com>wrote:
> There is an issue with representing opaque types in LLVM IR modules: if two
> modules are using the same opaque type (which is only going to be
> specialised at some later stage), it is only identified by its name. But
> the current module linker "resolves" this as if there is a name
clash, and
> one of that opaque types is renamed. It contradicts an intuitively
> expected
> identifier behaviour and makes it literally impossible to use opaque types
> for identifying underspecified types across different modules.
>
> Our position is that structure type names should be treated as proper
> identifiers, as long as types are structurally equivalent, and all the
> opaque types are structurally equivalent unless they're specialised.
>
> Could anyone familiar with the linker comment please?
>
> This is the problem I am having as well.
> Many thanks,
> Anton.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
--
-- Talin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110725/f8e386a6/attachment.html>
