Unbreak private_extern, which apparently we had zero tests for.
llvm-svn: 118034
diff --git a/clang/lib/AST/Decl.cpp b/clang/lib/AST/Decl.cpp
index 2eef54c..ca963ad 100644
--- a/clang/lib/AST/Decl.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/AST/Decl.cpp
@@ -278,11 +278,12 @@
LV.mergeVisibility(TypeLV.second);
}
+ if (Var->getStorageClass() == SC_PrivateExtern)
+ LV.setVisibility(HiddenVisibility, true);
+
if (!Context.getLangOptions().CPlusPlus &&
(Var->getStorageClass() == SC_Extern ||
Var->getStorageClass() == SC_PrivateExtern)) {
- if (Var->getStorageClass() == SC_PrivateExtern)
- LV.setVisibility(HiddenVisibility, true);
// C99 6.2.2p4:
// For an identifier declared with the storage-class specifier
@@ -307,6 +308,9 @@
// for justification). In practice, GCC doesn't do this, so it's
// just too painful to make work.
+ if (Function->getStorageClass() == SC_PrivateExtern)
+ LV.setVisibility(HiddenVisibility, true);
+
// C99 6.2.2p5:
// If the declaration of an identifier for a function has no
// storage-class specifier, its linkage is determined exactly