Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "subgoal".
2013 Jul 31
3
[LLVMdev] Proposing a new 'alloca' parameter attribute to implement the Microsoft C++ ABI
...o back up the sentiment that Oscar
expressed initially.)
I'm honestly just trying to understand why the engineering focus is
where it is, and wonders if anyone has put any thought into supporting
our own (or possibly someone else's, if it's documented) C++ ABI on
Windows, as a either a subgoal or parallel goal of full MSVC C++ ABI
implementation. As I said before, something like that wouldn't just be
a stop gap, it would provide real benefits on its own.
I'll stop hijacking this thread for that, though, sorry.
Stephen
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner...
2013 Jul 31
0
[LLVMdev] Proposing a new 'alloca' parameter attribute to implement the Microsoft C++ ABI
...Oscar
> expressed initially.)
>
> I'm honestly just trying to understand why the engineering focus is
> where it is, and wonders if anyone has put any thought into supporting
> our own (or possibly someone else's, if it's documented) C++ ABI on
> Windows, as a either a subgoal or parallel goal of full MSVC C++ ABI
> implementation. As I said before, something like that wouldn't just be
> a stop gap, it would provide real benefits on its own.
Thia patch and the others currently under development seem clearly aimed at
compatibility
If you or others are intereste...
2009 Jun 02
1
First ever Open Source Asterisk / Wave bounty
I've just received an email from a colleague who told me to put my
money where my mouth is ....
So here it is - I'm offering $500 and looking for other people to add to
this bounty.
We can get a group of people putting matching funds up to finalize the
scope of the first Open Source Asterisk / Wave conference call
integration robot bounty but if you have any other suggestions feel free
2013 Jul 31
0
[LLVMdev] Proposing a new 'alloca' parameter attribute to implement the Microsoft C++ ABI
This thread is odd to me. It seems that the gist of your guys' argument is that you don't know if we will ever get full support, therefore we don't welcome progress towards that (very useful) goal/feature.
If the specific proposal doesn't make make sense from a design standpoint, that's one thing, but saying we shouldn't take it because of licensing issues with MFC or
2013 Jul 31
3
[LLVMdev] Proposing a new 'alloca' parameter attribute to implement the Microsoft C++ ABI
> Quite the contrary, knowing that Clang's C++ ABI is completely
> incompatible with MS is a maintenance *simplification*.
Yes, for example, as explained by Bjarne once, incompatible name
mangling schemes for ABIs that are not guaranteed to be 100% binary
compatible is a _feature_, not a bug, since it prevents anyone from
even beginning to develop a workflow that relies upon linking