Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "bede4355".
2018 May 17
0
RFC: Removing TerminatorInst, simplifying calls
Hi,
I'm curious how it would affect the getTerminator() method of a basic block? I.e., how would one find the terminating instruction in that case? By iterating over all of them or ...?
Cheers,
Alex.
> On 17. May 2018, at 11:03, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Going to keep this RFC short and to the point:
>
> TerminatorInst
2018 May 17
15
RFC: Removing TerminatorInst, simplifying calls
Going to keep this RFC short and to the point:
TerminatorInst doesn't pull its weight in the type system. There is
essentially a single relevant API -- iterating successors. There is no
other interesting aspect shared -- the interface itself just dispatches to
specific instructions to be implemented.
On the flip side, CallInst and InvokeInst have *massive* amounts of code
shared and struggle