On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 10:55 AM <std-proposals-request_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 22:27:12 -0300
> From: Thiago Macieira <thiago_at_[hidden]>
> To: std-proposals_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Relocation in C++
> Message-ID: <3244672.irdbgypaU6_at_[hidden]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Monday, 19 December 2022 08:32:53 -03 S?bastien Bini via Std-Proposals
> wrote:
> > Problem is enabling relocation from function parameters passed by value.
> > For this to work, we need the ABI of the function to be callee-destroy
> (the
> > function itself is responsible for destroying its parameters). Otherwise
> if
> > the ABI were caller-destroy, then the function could not avoid the call
> to
> > the destructor on its input parameters, should some be passed to a
> > relocation constructor.
> >
> > The ABI break is planned to be opt-in and opt-out. Declaring a relocation
> > constructor on a class-type will force each function that takes that
> class
> > as value parameter to be callee-destroy (potential ABI break, depending
> on
> > compilers).
>
> Have you approached the ABI people? What have they said?
>
> https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/ has no matches for
> "reloc"
> or "relocation"
>
> --
> Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
> Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering
>
>
Not yet. That's something we must do, but I want first to finish the
proposal draft. It will also serve as a base material for the discussion
with the ABI people.