lhames added a comment. > OTOH it's a challenge to review since the patch is really big. Is there no > way to break it up and test in isolation? Or strip away details that could be > added in iterations? I had a short look and some comments, but I won't find > the time in the coming weeks to give it the attention it deserves. > > My biggest conceptual concern is that Value is part of the Interpreter > library. This is going to be a showstopper for out-of-process execution. > Conceptually, it should move into a runtime library (like the ORC runtime in > compiler-rt) and this won't get easier the more it is entangled with the > interpreter. I do see that this adds significant complexity and I guess it's > ok to keep this for later, but I do wonder what would be the best way to > prepare for it. Essentially, all communication with the interpreter will be > asynchronous. Is this something we can do already?
Similar thoughts here. In particular, is there a way to break the `IsSemiMissing`/ `repl_input_end` parts out from the Value part? It sounds like it would be helpful for `clang-repl` to land this as-is, but we should have a plan to replace this with something compatible with out-of-process execution in the longer term. At a guess I think that would mean using regular global variable instances to manage the storage on the executor side, an extended `MemoryAccess` interface to read/write the value from the REPL side when needed (e.g. for printing), and emitting glue functions to pass the variable's value in to callers. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D141215/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D141215 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
