Fw: [cxx-abi-dev] Decimal Floating Point mangling was(Fw: [cxx-abi-dev] C++0x: Mangling of rvalue reference type)s

[Dennis Handly]

>From: Michael Wong <michaelw at ca.ibm.com>
>We introduce many C99 concepts too into the C++ ABI even though they are not
>required from the C++ Std for similar reasons.

That's fine.  It just seems like we need this conversation documented.

>> And this form is mentioned:
>> ... the following catalog of abbreviations of the form "Sx" are used:

>This is to cover the case for vendors who actually wish to
>implement them as builtin types.

They can still mangled them as classes.

>From: Daveed Vandevoorde <daveed at edg.com>
>So I think Dennis is right: No special mangling code is needed here.   
>If a C++ compiler has native support, it should just disguise that  
>native support as a class type (from the ABI perspective, at least).

Well, the problem with a class type is the size.
We may want to use Sx to reduce the mangled string.

>From: Michael Wong <michaelw at ca.ibm.com>
>then we would need the mangling and settle it to be one or the other.

Yes.  But I wanted the rationale added to the ABI, why we didn't use
the class form, or the Sx abbreviation, or some other X?