Hi,
I was trying to remove some old code that handles ReturnInsts with
more than 1 operand -- see attached patch -- when I stumbled across
test/Assembler/aggregate-return-single-value.ll:
define { i32 } @fooa() nounwind {
ret i32 0
}
...
define [1 x i32] @fooc() nounwind {
ret i32 0
}
Is there really any need to handle these odd cases, where the type of
the value being returned doesn't match the return type of the
function?
Thanks,
Jay.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: multiple-return.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3410 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110401/21c05fd9/attachment.bin>
No reason, feel free to zap it. Thanks! -Chris On Apr 1, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Jay Foad <jay.foad at gmail.com> wrote:> Hi, > > I was trying to remove some old code that handles ReturnInsts with > more than 1 operand -- see attached patch -- when I stumbled across > test/Assembler/aggregate-return-single-value.ll: > > define { i32 } @fooa() nounwind { > ret i32 0 > } > ... > define [1 x i32] @fooc() nounwind { > ret i32 0 > } > > Is there really any need to handle these odd cases, where the type of > the value being returned doesn't match the return type of the > function? > > Thanks, > Jay. > <multiple-return.diff> > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
Seemingly Similar Threads
- Authors@R: and Author field
- variable names when using S3 methods
- [LLVMdev] Are there implicit rules or conventions for an llvm frontend to generate llvm IR?
- [LLVMdev] Are there implicit rules or conventions for an llvm frontend to generate llvm IR?
- [RFC] Clean up the way we store optional Function data