llvm dev - May 2018 - Adding new a new type

I was reading: https://llvm.org/docs/ExtendingLLVM.html

And am heeding the warnings that come with new (derived) types.

I'm trying to use LLVM to model chemicals.  More specifically, there are
several reactive groups that exist: salts, bases, acids, etc. that
adequately represent their respective values.  I, for obvious reasons, want
to manifest those types in LLVM so I can type check a given input and use
LLVM for all my compilation needs.

I'm uncertain what I should do with respect to LLVM and the guidance the
documentation provides for adding new types.

Thanks!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180514/46cc7552/attachment.html>

On 5/14/2018 4:18 PM, Jason Ott via llvm-dev wrote:
> I was reading: https://llvm.org/docs/ExtendingLLVM.html
>
> And am heeding the warnings that come with new (derived) types.
>
> I'm trying to use LLVM to model chemicals.  More specifically, there 
> are several reactive groups that exist: salts, bases, acids, etc. that 
> adequately represent their respective values.  I, for obvious reasons, 
> want to manifest those types in LLVM so I can type check a given input 
> and use LLVM for all my compilation needs.
>
> I'm uncertain what I should do with respect to LLVM and the guidance 
> the documentation provides for adding new types.
You almost certainly don't want a new type in that sense.  Try 
https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#structure-type instead.

-Eli

-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux
Foundation Collaborative Project

Ok, so I can use the structure-type to represent base or acid or salts.  My
next question is how union-typing works in LLVM.  After reading a bit
about, it's unclear to me if it is a "thing" anymore; my intuition
-- and
poking around in the sources is that it's a "no", it's been
deprecated.

Which then means that it doesn't much matter about typing LLVM.  I can pass
that up to a python script and handle typing up there.

I just want to make sure this is accurate.

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 4:27 PM, Friedman, Eli <efriedma at
codeaurora.org>
wrote:
> On 5/14/2018 4:18 PM, Jason Ott via llvm-dev wrote:
>
>> I was reading: https://llvm.org/docs/ExtendingLLVM.html
>>
>> And am heeding the warnings that come with new (derived) types.
>>
>> I'm trying to use LLVM to model chemicals.  More specifically,
there are
>> several reactive groups that exist: salts, bases, acids, etc. that
>> adequately represent their respective values.  I, for obvious reasons,
want
>> to manifest those types in LLVM so I can type check a given input and
use
>> LLVM for all my compilation needs.
>>
>> I'm uncertain what I should do with respect to LLVM and the
guidance the
>> documentation provides for adding new types.
>>
>
> You almost certainly don't want a new type in that sense.  Try
> https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#structure-type instead.
>
> -Eli
>
> --
> Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux
> Foundation Collaborative Project
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180514/a0e5fd51/attachment.html>