xbolva00 added a comment. In D114425#3329303 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114425#3329303>, @philnik wrote:
> In D114425#3225908 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114425#3225908>, @erichkeane > wrote: > >> In D114425#3225892 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114425#3225892>, @craig.topper >> wrote: >> >>> I kind of wonder if we should detect the __int128 type being requested in >>> ASTContext::GetBuiltinType and return an error up to >>> Sema::LazilyCreateBuiltin. Probably requires a new error code and handling >>> for it in LazilyCreateBuiltin. I assume that would catch the bad builtin >>> earlier. As it stands now we'd still allow it if it constant folds away in >>> ExprConstant.cpp so that it never reaches CGBuiltin.cpp. But I'm not a >>> frontend expert. Adding more potential reviewers >> >> I think I like that idea, "DecodeTypeFromStr" should probably test if >> __int128 is supported. Having us only diagnose in codegen is the wrong >> approach here, we need to reject it in Sema. >> >> I would also want to see some IR-tests to show how this looks in IR, >> particularly one where it takes an __int128 as parameter (plus others that >> show the return value is valid?). > > Where should I put the tests? test/CodeGen Test with -emit-llvm. There are other similar tests :) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D114425/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D114425 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
