Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "9e0f1cc0".
Did you mean:
900d1cc0
2011 Jul 27
3
[LLVMdev] Proposal for better assertions in LLVM
...s to make the call, just wanted to make
> sure a slightly different implementation was on the table in case it does go
> in...
>
--
-- Talin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110727/9e0f1cc0/attachment.html>
2011 Jul 27
0
[LLVMdev] Proposal for better assertions in LLVM
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote:
> The assertions in LLVM would be a lot more useful if they could print out
> not only the source code of the expression that failed, but also print the
> values of the various arguments. To that end, I have an idea for an improved
> assert macro which would use raw_ostream. It would look something like this:
2011 Jul 26
5
[LLVMdev] Proposal for better assertions in LLVM
The assertions in LLVM would be a lot more useful if they could print out
not only the source code of the expression that failed, but also print the
values of the various arguments. To that end, I have an idea for an improved
assert macro which would use raw_ostream. It would look something like this:
ASSERT_STRM(Ty == STy, "Expected " << Ty << " but got "