HendrikHuebner wrote: > > Might be a good moment to check whether this is the best approach (cc > > @andykaylor @xlauko). Others raised the question if we really need to map > > them into CIR this early or whether it makes sense to only generate them > > during lowering time. TBH I don't remember the full discussion we had > > couple years back in the incubator (cc @Lancern @PikachuHyA), but this has > > been discussed before. Might be related to the fact that we need to keep > > some information around to distinguish some of the types, and instead of > > changing the types themselves it made sense at the time to have TBAA > > populated as side information, "only pay for what you use" kinda thing. > > My personal take is that this is fine as an initial approach, once the > > lowering part gets upstreamed we'll have good test coverage to simplify > > CIRGen if needed. > > @bcardosolopes I’m afraid I don’t really remember the details, and I don’t > have time to look them up right now. > > could you clarify what the CIR merge policy is, especially regarding > authorship/attribution? I’m a bit concerned whether names from previous work > might get dropped in the process.
Depending on whether or not we end up merging this I could add you as a co-author, since this PR is mostly a duplicate from your work on the incubator repo. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/169226 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
