honggyu.kim added a comment. You made a comment while I was writing other comment :)
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D12906#248392, @zaks.anna wrote: > This new patch does not seem to build on top of > http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305 but is an alternative way of generating the > hash that reuses a lot of the building blocks from the other patch. What is > the reason for that? Yes, this patch is not on top of http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305, I just copied some code from it, so this patch doesn't have dependency with it. > (It also addresses your comment to this patch and creates the GetIssueHash > subroutine as well as addresses my comment and uses the computed hash in > issue_hash, which is used by CmpRuns. Thanks!) I just tried not to change the existing working behaviour. Most of code are written by Babati, I just recomposed them. Thanks! http://reviews.llvm.org/D12906 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
