Mangling constructors

[Jim Dehnert]

> From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery.com>
> 
> There's an inconsistency in the mangling spec vs. the closed issues
> list.  The closed issues list says constructors never do allocation,
> but the mangling document has:
> 
>   ::= C3 # complete object (in-charge) allocating constructor
>   ::= C4 # base object (not-in-charge) allocating constructor
> 
> Presumably these aren't needed?

We have decided not to specify allocating constructors (although we
have a low-priority issue C-13 to reconsider this).  However, we
specified the mangling in case implementations choose to implement
them.

Jim

-	    Jim Dehnert		dehnert at sgi.com
				(650)933-4272