[ Date Prev][ Date Next][ Thread Prev][ Thread Next][ Date Index][ Thread Index]
Mangling of anonymous unions?
- To: cxx-abi-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Mangling of anonymous unions?
- From: Jason Merrill <jason@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:54:30 -0500
I just noticed that the ABI doesn't define a mangling for anonymous
unions. This is only really relevant for static local anonymous unions in
inline functions; all others are private to a translation unit.
The choices would seem to be:
1) Use the name of the first member.
2) Use the name of the largest member.
3) Treat them like string literals, perhaps using 'u' instead of 's'.
g++ currently does #2. But it also fails to allocate space for such a
union (q.v. g++.brendan/union1.C), so there's no binary compatibility issue
in choosing a different answer.
My order of preference is 3, 1, 2. And yes, I'm volunteering to fix g++.
Jason
|