Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "getvoidptrti".
Did you mean:
getvoidptrty
2012 May 08
0
[LLVMdev] Discussion of eliminating the void type
Hello Duncan,
There is a discussion with Chris Lattner:
http://old.nabble.com/Eliminating-the-'void'-type-td33726468.html
In the discussion, Chris Lattner suggest Type::getVoidTy() should
still exist and
return {} for API continuity. If VoidTy and isVoidTy() go away, how do deal with
the isVoidTy() function call in LLVM source tree? Another issue is: What should
ReturnInst constructor
2012 May 08
4
[LLVMdev] Discussion of eliminating the void type
Hi Dan,
>> I am willing to do "eliminating the void type" project.
>
> Is this really a good idea? I'm not going to argue at length
> about it, but it is worth thinking about.
>
> The only practical downsides of void are when newcomers take C's
> syntax for functions with no arguments a little too literally, or
> when they try to create pointers to