Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "fe92424b".
2018 May 17
0
RFC: Removing TerminatorInst, simplifying calls
Are there any instructions that aren't terminators now, but will become
terminators with this change? I'm wondering if this is going to affect
reading old bitcode, and if so, how it will be handled.
-Krzysztof
On 5/17/2018 4:03 AM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev wrote:
> Going to keep this RFC short and to the point:
>
> TerminatorInst doesn't pull its weight in the type
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