llvm dev - Oct 2010 - [LLVMdev] Values have no names when generating *.ll files in clang and llvm 2.8 ?

On Oct 13, 2010, at 12:16 PM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi Alexandra,
> 
>> I upgraded to llvm 2.8 and when I generate *.ll files from C/C++ with
>> clang -S -emit-llvm I obtain a *.ll file in which instructions and
>> basicblocks have no names.
>> I tried as well compiling with the -g option, but no names were given.
> 
> with dragonegg using -fverbose-asm causes names to be generated in the IR.
> Maybe clang could do this to?
This isn't a 2.8 change, the issue is that release-without-asserts builds
don't add names on instructions (because IRBuilder gets a different
argument).

-Chris

Hi Chris,
> This isn't a 2.8 change, the issue is that release-without-asserts
builds don't add names on instructions (because IRBuilder gets a different
argument).
having the output of clang depend on whether clang was built with assertions
on or not sounds like a bad idea to me.

Ciao,

Duncan.

On Oct 14, 2010, at 12:21 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
>> This isn't a 2.8 change, the issue is that release-without-asserts
builds don't add names on instructions (because IRBuilder gets a different
argument).
> 
> having the output of clang depend on whether clang was built with
assertions
> on or not sounds like a bad idea to me.
While I agree in the abstract that this is an independent choice from
assertions and optimization, I'm not convinced that it's an important
enough feature to seriously complicate our configuration over.
Nobody really wants names unless they're debugging a compiler,
and even then they're not crucial.  They should be on by default as
long as Debug builds are the default, but we don't want people to
unintentionally make production compilers with names enabled.

I think there's a case to be made that we should kill names based on
--enable-optimized instead of --disable-assertions.  The only problem
is that --enable-optimized doesn't actually turn into a -D right now.

John.