================
@@ -410,6 +366,21 @@ bool Vocabulary::invalidate(Module &M, const
PreservedAnalyses &PA,
return !(PAC.preservedWhenStateless());
}
+Vocabulary::VocabVector Vocabulary::createDummyVocabForTest(unsigned Dim) {
+ VocabVector DummyVocab;
+ DummyVocab.reserve(NumCanonicalEntries);
+ float DummyVal = 0.1f;
+ // Create a dummy vocabulary with entries for all opcodes, types, and
+ // operands
+ for ([[maybe_unused]] unsigned _ :
----------------
svkeerthy wrote:
(This loop/method is not new. Got moved around in the file.) Both ways would
have the same effect, if I am not wrong. And, we have used such for loops
throughout this code. I'd prefer to keep it this way unless required.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/155323
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
