search for: yianns

...? Because, IMO, we could do that by just moving the Deleter::doFinalization functionality to Printer::doFinalization (introduce it as this doesn't exist). The attached patch seems to work. Take it as a prototype as it needs a unittest just to be sure in the future! Does this seem reasonable? yianns -- Yiannis Tsiouris Ph.D. student, Software Engineering Laboratory, National Technical University of Athens WWW: http://www.softlab.ntua.gr/~gtsiour -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GCMetadata.patch Type: text/x-diff Size: 2199 bytes Desc: not av...

Hello Yiannis, I am not an expert on metadata or the CG information but one of the two has to happen: - Simply moving the deleter pass to a different spot - Changing the doFinalization of another pass (Printer?) to do the deleter pass job (this should work now because the doFinalization order is the reverse of the doInitialization order) Option 1 is a smaller change, option 2 will make the code

Hi Pedro (et al.), On 02/14/2013 11:43 PM, Pedro Artigas wrote: > I believe what is going on is that there is an issue with the way that information is deleted (the CG information). Yeap, that's exactly the problem! :-) I noticed that the GCModuleInfo::iterator (line 931 in lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/AsmPrinter.cpp) is empty and, thus, GCMetadataPrinter::finishAssembly is never called.