Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "r112356".
Did you mean:
112356
2010 Aug 28
4
[LLVMdev] Union type, is it really used or necessary?
I removed unions from mainline in r112356.
-Chris
On Jul 20, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Talin wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 20, 2010, at 1:36 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
>
> >> used to make the code manipulating the union type "well typed"...
2010 Sep 07
0
[LLVMdev] Union type, is it really used or necessary?
Chris Lattner wrote:
> I removed unions from mainline in r112356.
Sorry for reviving this old thread, but I think the removal of
unions is a real pity.
I use Haskell to generate LLVM code using David Terei's LLVM
code from the GHC compiler (the compiler I'm working on is also
written in Haskell). Once I've generated LLVM IR code I use llc
to genera...
2010 Jul 20
0
[LLVMdev] Union type, is it really used or necessary?
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 20, 2010, at 1:36 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
>
> >> used to make the code manipulating the union type "well typed". This
> >> approach seems work very well, is there really a need to keep union type
> in
> >> LLVM?
> > I think in its current
2010 Jul 20
4
[LLVMdev] Union type, is it really used or necessary?
On Jul 20, 2010, at 1:36 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
>> used to make the code manipulating the union type "well typed". This
>> approach seems work very well, is there really a need to keep union type in
>> LLVM?
> I think in its current state the unions should be removed from LLVM IR
> in next release. It's pretty much unfinished and noone is willing to