search for: cfccc154

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 2:03 AM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > 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

...LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180517/cfccc154/attachment.html>

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