mharoush marked an inline comment as done.
mharoush added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Parse/ParseStmtAsm.cpp:100
+ // result of a call to LookupInlineAsmIdentifier.
+ bool EvaluateLookupAsEnum(void *LookupResult, int64_t &Result) {
+ if (!LookupResult) return false;
----------------
rnk wrote:
> Please format this, clang-format will do the job
Revised
================
Comment at: test/CodeGen/x86-ms-inline-asm-enum_feature.cpp:12
+ const int a = 0;
+ // CHECK-NOT: mov eax, [$$0]
+ __asm mov eax, [a]
----------------
rnk wrote:
> Use CHECK-LABEL, CHECK, and CHECK-SAME the way that the existing
> ms-inline-asm.c tests do so that this test is easier to debug when it fails.
This test case was just meant verify that other Integer constants are not
folded since we get a different behavior for statements such as mov eax, [a].
#---
In this example X86AsmParser regards the address of the variable 'a' and not
its value i.e. we end up with the value of 'a' in eax (loaded from the stack)
and not with the value pointed by the const int value of 'a' as its address.
---#
I can clarify the intention in a comment or completely remove the test case
since this isn't really required here.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33277
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
