search for: d25878

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Oct 26, 2016, at 1:34 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> > wrote: > >> Responding to both of your emails in one, sorry for the delay: >> >> On Oct 25, 2016, at 11:20 AM,

On Oct 26, 2016, at 1:34 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com <mailto:clattner at apple.com>> wrote: > Responding to both of your emails in one, sorry for the delay: > >> On Oct 25, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk <mailto:peter at

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 5:49 AM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > >>> @foo = globalconst i32 42 > >>> > >>> > >>> This is equivalent to writing "foo = 42" in assembly? > >> > >> > >> Yes. > > > > > > Back in the day the idea was to use an alias whose ConstantExpr

...balConstant class which supports definitions > and declarations > > > Why would globalconstant need to support declarations? Seems like an > external global should be able to handle this case. > An external globalvariable? I am not sure how to reconcile this with your comment on D25878: > LLVM IR global variables should always be assumable that they don't alias. I'm thinking of the case where we have two globalconstants which happen to have the same value. - It should derive from GlobalValue > - No type changes for GlobalValue (i.e. still required to be pointer t...

> On Oct 24, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk <mailto:peter at pcc.me.uk>> wrote: > The specific change I have in mind is to allow !range metadata on GlobalObjects. This would > be similar to existing !range metadata, but it would apply to the

Responding to both of your emails in one, sorry for the delay: > On Oct 25, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > I think there are a couple of additional considerations we should make here: > What are we trying to model? To me it's clear that GlobalConstant is for modelling integers, not pointers. That alone may not necessarily be enough to