NoQ added a comment. In D82598#2119545 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D82598#2119545>, @xazax.hun wrote:
> > Given that we'd also barely ever notice that we forgot one of those, i'm > > very much in favor of having liveness analysis instead, that would > > declaratively describe which expressions are live when, so that to > > automatically guarantee that we always only track what's necessary and > > never snowball our state with dead expressions. > > Fair point. I do not remember any problem with the current liveness analysis > so I guess if something is not broken do not fix it. We also don't have any > evidence of this being a bottleneck. D55566 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55566>! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D82598/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D82598 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
