llvm dev - Oct 2010 - [LLVMdev] pass case sensitive information to a llvm target backend

Hi,

we're writing a new target backend (based on the c backend) for the
llvm. We need to pass case sensitive strings from the command line to
the backend (unix paths). Currently we're using the Subtarget features
string to relay the information.
It turns out that the llvm applies a to_lower to the this string, so
unix paths become basically useless.
Is there a better way to pass this information to the backend. If not,
what are the chances that a patch that disables the conversion to lower
case for this string is accepted?

Thx,
Alex

P.S.: Sorry for double post, this belongs on llvmdev not cfe-dev

Hi,

we use the llvm to lower c++ code to c code which can be run through our 
abstract interpretation framework
(based on CIL). Along with the c code we emit some structured text files 
that contain the "lost" information
(class hierarchy, private/public attributes etc). In order to output 
this information in a sensible way we need to pass unix paths and some 
more case sensitive information (class names) to the backend (which is 
derived from the c backend).

Alex

On 10/18/2010 07:13 PM, Jim Grosbach wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 8:31 AM, Alexander Herz wrote:
>    
>> we're writing a new target backend (based on the c backend) for the
>> llvm. We need to pass case sensitive strings from the command line to
>> the backend (unix paths). Currently we're using the Subtarget
features
>> string to relay the information.
>> It turns out that the llvm applies a to_lower to the this string, so
>> unix paths become basically useless.
>> Is there a better way to pass this information to the backend. If not,
>> what are the chances that a patch that disables the conversion to lower
>> case for this string is accepted?
>>      
> Hi Alex,
>
> Whether there's a better way to pass the information you want to the
backend will likely depend a bit more on the specifics of what you're trying
to do. Can you elaborate a bit with a simple example, perhaps?
>
> -Jim