search for: addfastcallstdcallsuffix

Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "addfastcallstdcallsuffix".

2013 Feb 20
2
[LLVMdev] x86_stdcallcc @<n> mangling vs. '\1' prefix [was: x86_stdcallcc and extra name mangling on Windows]
...part >> but keep the rest of the CC that I missed? > if you use "\1" + "usual name", it will disable name mangling if you are > lucky. A leading \1 is LLVM's way of saying: leave this name alone! Seems like I'm out of luck - the @<n> suffix is added (AddFastCallStdCallSuffix) in the GlobalValue Magnler::getNameWithPrefix overload, without paying respect to whether the name originally had a '\1' prefix or not. Should this be changed? David
2013 Feb 20
4
[LLVMdev] x86_stdcallcc @<n> mangling vs. '\1' prefix [was: x86_stdcallcc and extra name mangling on Windows]
...hat I missed? >> > if you use "\1" + "usual name", it will disable name mangling if you are >> > lucky. A leading \1 is LLVM's way of saying: leave this name alone! >> >> Seems like I'm out of luck - the @<n> suffix is added >> (AddFastCallStdCallSuffix) in the GlobalValue >> Magnler::getNameWithPrefix overload, without paying respect to whether >> the name originally had a '\1' prefix or not. >> >> Should this be changed? >> >> David >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM...
2013 Feb 20
0
[LLVMdev] x86_stdcallcc @<n> mangling vs. '\1' prefix [was: x86_stdcallcc and extra name mangling on Windows]
...the rest of the CC that I missed? > > if you use "\1" + "usual name", it will disable name mangling if you are > > lucky. A leading \1 is LLVM's way of saying: leave this name alone! > > Seems like I'm out of luck - the @<n> suffix is added > (AddFastCallStdCallSuffix) in the GlobalValue > Magnler::getNameWithPrefix overload, without paying respect to whether > the name originally had a '\1' prefix or not. > > Should this be changed? > > David > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LL...
2013 Feb 20
0
[LLVMdev] x86_stdcallcc @<n> mangling vs. '\1' prefix [was: x86_stdcallcc and extra name mangling on Windows]
...t;> > if you use "\1" + "usual name", it will disable name mangling if you are >>> > lucky. A leading \1 is LLVM's way of saying: leave this name alone! >>> >>> Seems like I'm out of luck - the @<n> suffix is added >>> (AddFastCallStdCallSuffix) in the GlobalValue >>> Magnler::getNameWithPrefix overload, without paying respect to whether >>> the name originally had a '\1' prefix or not. >>> >>> Should this be changed? >>> >>> David >>> _________________________________...
2013 Mar 29
2
[LLVMdev] x86_stdcallcc @<n> mangling vs. '\1' prefix [was: x86_stdcallcc and extra name mangling on Windows]
...uot;\1" + "usual name", it will disable name mangling if you > are > >>> > lucky. A leading \1 is LLVM's way of saying: leave this name alone! > >>> > >>> Seems like I'm out of luck - the @<n> suffix is added > >>> (AddFastCallStdCallSuffix) in the GlobalValue > >>> Magnler::getNameWithPrefix overload, without paying respect to whether > >>> the name originally had a '\1' prefix or not. > >>> > >>> Should this be changed? > >>> > >>> David > >>&gt...
2013 Feb 22
1
[LLVMdev] x86_stdcallcc @<n> mangling vs. '\1' prefix [was: x86_stdcallcc and extra name mangling on Windows]
...ou use "\1" + "usual name", it will disable name mangling if you are >>>> > lucky. A leading \1 is LLVM's way of saying: leave this name alone! >>>> >>>> Seems like I'm out of luck - the @<n> suffix is added >>>> (AddFastCallStdCallSuffix) in the GlobalValue >>>> Magnler::getNameWithPrefix overload, without paying respect to whether >>>> the name originally had a '\1' prefix or not. >>>> >>>> Should this be changed? >>>> >>>> David >>>> _____...