[cxx-abi-dev] Non-cloned [cd]tors

[Jason Merrill]

On 11/18/2009 04:01 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> Making the base be the "real" function seems more natural to me, particularly
> as if there is a non-trivial difference, the base would be real anyway.

It seems more natural to me as well, but I think would lead to more 
situations where we need to produce both symbols rather than just one. 
That's certainly the case for virtual destructors, since the complete 
version is referenced by both the vtable and the deleting destructor.

> I don't see any execution problem, but the change would adversely affect the
> debugging experience and programmers would see themselves calling the base
> constructor rather than the outer constructor.  Whether that effect is worth
> worrying about is a separate issue.

I think not; from a language perspective there's only one constructor 
anyway.

Jason