search for: newirbuilder

...s DIFactory and debug info quality has remained same. This says the IR used to encode debug has not been impacted by DIBuilder vs. DIFactory. Note, DIBuilder etc.. are utilities sued to produce IR, not the interface defined by the IR. In other words, replacement of of OldIRBuilder interface with NewIRBuilder has nothing to do with stability of llvm IR documented by LangRef.html. > What I'm proposing is a simple rule-set, enforced by a validation > pass, that will reject dubious metadata. We could start as an optional > pass, being very restrictive and failing most known code and unit >...

...of metadata information in each IR statement. That's probably the reason why, in my case (and probably Talin's), it all blew up. > Note, DIBuilder etc.. are utilities sued to produce IR, not the interface defined by the IR.  In other words, replacement of of OldIRBuilder interface with NewIRBuilder has nothing to do with stability of llvm IR documented by LangRef.html. Yes, I know. I'm more concerned with the 'what' and not the 'how'. For me, an up-to-date documentation on what's strictly needed to produce legal Dwarf with a clear, short, explanation for each field an...

On 17 March 2011 13:48, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > I think you are mistaken here. I maintain and support debug info for two front ends (llvm-gcc and clang). Go ahead and check svn archives for last one year and see how many times I had to update llvm-gcc FE. Hi Devang, First, I'm not attacking anyone. I said before and will say again: the work you've done is

Renato, On Mar 17, 2011, at 3:25 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > could help with the verification process (since it's much better to > fail verification than to fail gdb testuite), but I don't know the > design decisions being taken for debug information/metadata, and they > change too frequently to dig the code to learn. I think you are mistaken here. I maintain and support