steakhal added a comment.
In D136162#3869645 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D136162#3869645>, @NoQ wrote:
>> In this example, we try to store 42 to the Elem{buffer, 0}.
>
> In this case the natural question is, why does it go through `bindArray()`?
> We're not binding an array. Can we try to preserve the contract that
> `bindArray()` only deals with arrays?
>
> @martong's comment makes sense to me, it sounds like this could be a case of
> `CallEvent::getRuntimeDefinition()` not picking up the right definition, at
> least not consistently.
Thank you @martong and @NoQ for the helpful comments. They really helped a lot
to look at this problem from a new perspective!
I hope, this new approach is more aligned with your expectations.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136162/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136162
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
