chandlerc added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D28053#629830, @mehdi_amini wrote:
> > It would be awesome if attribute sets were a bit more FileCheck friendly, > > but oh well. > > I've been wondering about that, what's the point of attribute sets in the > textual IR? > I understand the idea for saving space in the Bitcode, but the IR does not > have to use the same representation. Will return to the actual patch review, but as an aside, I would *strongly* support going back to printing attributes in the canonical location in the function declaration / definition. It has huge advantages: - Can FileCheck individual function's attributes rather than a set at a time - Can place those checks after a CHECK-LABEL for the function name - Can have a CHECK-LABEL for the function name, CHECKs for attributes *and* CHECKs for function body stuff, which today is extremely hard to combine into a single test. Happy to help with this if you want to pursue it. https://reviews.llvm.org/D28053 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
