llvm dev - Nov 2011 - [LLVMdev] Instrumentation passes and -O0 optimization level

> Unfortunately, it looks like your email got garbled... Please attach
patches
> as actual files rather than as text at the end of the message, otherwise
> lots of email software does the wrong thing with them...
See attached. Sorry for that.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: clang.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111122/d8baa0e3/attachment.bin>

On Nov 22, 2011, at 3:25 AM, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
>> Unfortunately, it looks like your email got garbled... Please attach
patches
>> as actual files rather than as text at the end of the message,
otherwise
>> lots of email software does the wrong thing with them...
> See attached. Sorry for that.
> <clang.patch>
> + EP_EnabledOnOptLevel0
I'd rename this as EP_AlwaysEnabled

-
Devang
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

>
>> + EP_EnabledOnOptLevel0
>
> I'd rename this as EP_AlwaysEnabled
>
Renamed, see the attachment.

But note that one needs to add his pass at two extension points: at O0
and wherever else he wanted to add it.
Won't such a name confuse the user?
E.g. he may think that just adding a pass as "EP_AlwaysEnabled" should
be enough to have it at any optimization level.

PS. Should we move the discussion to cfe-commits or it's ok to
continue the review process here?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: clang.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1804 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111129/246caba6/attachment.bin>