On Jun 11, 2012, at 2:01 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> Other comments:
>
> Why is this not behind an extension warning? I don't think we want to blindly
> accept this code until the parsing and sema logic has settled significantly.
We've been blinding accepting it for months. I'll see about adding the
extension warning.
>
> Also, I think the CodeGen part really isn't ready to be committed yet:
>
> +
> +void CodeGenFunction::EmitMSAsmStmt(const MSAsmStmt &S) {
> + // Analyze the asm string to decompose it into its pieces. We know that
> Sema
> + // has already done this, so it is guaranteed to be successful.
> +
> + // Assemble the pieces into the final asm string.
> + std::string AsmString = S.getAsmString()->getString().str();
> +
> + // Get all the output and input constraints together.
> +
> + std::vector<llvm::Value*> Args;
> + std::vector<llvm::Type *> ArgTypes;
> + std::string Constraints;
> +
> + // Keep track of inout constraints.
> +
> + // Append the "input" part of inout constraints last.
> +
> + // Clobbers
>
> This isn't even code yet. I think this shouldn't be committed until you
> actually have some working implementation, or it should be a simple stub
> function that immediately errors saying that MS-style asm codegen isn't yet
> supported.
This does work in the most basic of cases(, but not really… =/ ) I'm fine
with converting this into a stub function that errors.
>
> Anyways, I'm excited by the work, and I'd really like to see the overall
> design in more detail. One thing that would be good for this is perhaps a RFC
> email with a sketch of the design, and then committing that as an in-progress
> language extension in Clang's documentation.
Good to hear. I think a RFC would be a great idea! I'll start putting
something together.
Thanks fro the feedback, Chandler.
Chad
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
