[cxx-abi-dev] Name mangling for explicit overriders

[Mark Mitchell]

> I think the idea has merit for constructs that are truly
> expected to be vendor-specific (i.e., proprietary).  However,
> I see the selective overriding as something closer to the
> "restrict" support in the current ABI: Not quite standard, but
> we expect that vendors who will implement it will agree on
> the meaning.
> 
> Note that this is in fact not an "EDG extension": It is a
> Microsoft extension implemented in the EDG compiler.

At the moment, this new kind of overriding is an extension both to C++
and the ABI.
 
I think we have the following choices:

1. Do nothing.

2. Treat it as a probable extension (ala restrict) to the standard, and
include it in the ABI specification.

3. Treat it as a vendor extension, and try to come up with a sensible
framework for such things.

Do you have a sense of how probable it is that this extension will
actually find its way into the standard?  That estimation seems it like
it might be persuasive in deciding between (2) and (3).

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark at codesourcery.com