search for: generaldynamic

...the old ones around, and then delete the > old constructors once clang is updated. Yes, this would probably be the best. To make clang build I just hacked the constructors in the patch I posted, but they should really just forward to the new ones. >> *) Please name the most general model GeneralDynamicTLSMode. Elf's >> default visibility being called 'default' is already confusing enough >> :-) > > I was thinking that calling it GeneralDynamicTLSMode wouldn't make > sense for non-ELF targets. My thinking was that DefaultTLSModel would > mean "use the d...

...t; old constructors once clang is updated. > > Yes, this would probably be the best. To make clang build I just > hacked the constructors in the patch I posted, but they should really > just forward to the new ones. Right. Doing that. >>> *) Please name the most general model GeneralDynamicTLSMode. Elf's >>> default visibility being called 'default' is already confusing enough >>> :-) >> >> I was thinking that calling it GeneralDynamicTLSMode wouldn't make >> sense for non-ELF targets. My thinking was that DefaultTLSModel would >&...

...s reviewed on cfe-commits), so my plan was just to commit them both at once. If we don't want to do that, I think we should try to add the new constructors while keeping the old ones around, and then delete the old constructors once clang is updated. > *) Please name the most general model GeneralDynamicTLSMode. Elf's > default visibility being called 'default' is already confusing enough > :-) I was thinking that calling it GeneralDynamicTLSMode wouldn't make sense for non-ELF targets. My thinking was that DefaultTLSModel would mean "use the default model for the target...

...ew. Awesome, thanks! I will try to do a more complete review tonight or tomorrow. For now, just two quick observations *) This breaks the clang build, it would be nice to for the first commit to keep the old API. It can be removed as soon as clang is updated. *) Please name the most general model GeneralDynamicTLSMode. Elf's default visibility being called 'default' is already confusing enough :-) I was not sure how hard the first item would be, so I just gave it a try. The resulting patch is attached. > Thanks, > Hans Cheers, Rafael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text...

> OK, let's go with GeneralDynamicTLSModel then. OK >> The restrictions should be documented too. > > I'm not sure how much detail we should go into here, because the > restrictions might vary depending on the environment. For example, > with glibc, it will be possible to use initial-exec in a .so that will &...