search for: d20eec31

...anymore. > (getVoidTy) have equivalent relation in LLVM. For API continuity, Type::getVoidTy() should still exist, but it should return {}. -Chris -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120423/d20eec31/attachment.html>

Hello Chris The general concept is to replace void with {}. Void is a weird type in >> that it is only allowed as the return value of functions and as the type of >> instructions like store. It seems better (though also not particularly >> high priority) to eliminate it to make the type system more consistent. >> > MVT::isVoid and Type::VoidTyID (getVoidTy) have