v.g.vassilev abandoned this revision.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
Herald added a project: All.
This landed slightly modified here:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4d54e543abd5d0a8b0a321f8c292252f4895693a
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3/new/
https://rev
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
A version of this landed in r311843. I am keeping in mind this discussion and
I'd like to follow up with @rjmccall once I open the more major review item
(libInterpreter).
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3
___
cfe-commi
v.g.vassilev updated this revision to Diff 112813.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
Type& name -> Type &name.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3
Files:
include/clang/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.h
lib/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.cpp
Index: lib/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.cpp
==
v.g.vassilev updated this revision to Diff 112812.
v.g.vassilev marked an inline comment as done.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
std::string& -> llvm::StringRef.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3
Files:
include/clang/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.h
lib/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.cpp
Index: lib/CodeGen/Mo
rjmccall added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#818047, @v.g.vassilev wrote:
> >> I am open to changing this code as well. That should probably be another
> >> review.
> >
> > I agree. Are you comfortable with blocking this review until that lands?
> > It seems like it would sig
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#818030, @rjmccall wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#812836, @v.g.vassilev wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#812418, @rjmccall wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#795175, @v.g.vassilev wrote:
>
rjmccall added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#812836, @v.g.vassilev wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#812418, @rjmccall wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#795175, @v.g.vassilev wrote:
> >
> > > @rjmccall, thanks for the prompt and thorough reply.
> > >
> > >
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#812418, @rjmccall wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#795175, @v.g.vassilev wrote:
>
> > @rjmccall, thanks for the prompt and thorough reply.
> >
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#793311, @rjmccall wrote:
> >
> > > Okay
rjmccall added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#795175, @v.g.vassilev wrote:
> @rjmccall, thanks for the prompt and thorough reply.
>
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#793311, @rjmccall wrote:
>
> > Okay. In that case, I see two problems, one major and one potentially
> > major.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
ping...
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
v.g.vassilev added a subscriber: karies.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
@rjmccall, thanks for the prompt and thorough reply.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D3#793311, @rjmccall wrote:
> Okay. In that case, I see two problems, one major and one potentially major.
This is a very accurate di
rjmccall added a comment.
Okay. In that case, I see two problems, one major and one potentially major.
The major problem is that, as Richard alludes to, you need to make sure you
emit any on-demand definitions that Sema registered with CodeGen during the
initial CGM's lifetime but used in late
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
We use them as separate translation units due to the fact that we need to
survive multiple calls to `HandleEndOfTranslationUnit`. This 'finalizes' the
module, and we cannot write to it anymore. Even though we could write to it
(this was the case when we were using
rjmccall added a comment.
What's the relationship between these llvm::Modules that you want to generate?
Are you imagining them as separate translation units, or are the subsequent
modules more like addenda to the original?
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3
___
rsmith added a comment.
This makes sense to me, but I'd like John's input on whether this is a
reasonable facility for CodeGen to have, and whether this is sufficient for
(for example) inline function definitions to be emitted at the right times into
the right `Module`s. (The tests for this app
v.g.vassilev updated this revision to Diff 103565.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
Bring back the initial state of this patch. I accidentally uploaded a wrong
patch here, instead of its dependee...
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3
Files:
include/clang/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.h
lib/CodeGen/Modul
v.g.vassilev updated this revision to Diff 103560.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
Herald added a subscriber: mgorny.
Add a test.
Patch by Axel Naumann!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3
Files:
lib/CodeGen/CGDeclCXX.cpp
unittests/CodeGen/CMakeLists.txt
unittests/CodeGen/IncrementalProcessing
v.g.vassilev updated this revision to Diff 103360.
v.g.vassilev added a comment.
Fix compilation issue.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D3
Files:
include/clang/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.h
lib/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.cpp
Index: lib/CodeGen/ModuleBuilder.cpp
=
v.g.vassilev created this revision.
When `isIncrementalProcessingEnabled` is on we might call multiple times
`HandleEndOfTranslationUnit`. This would complete the `llvm::Module` CodeGen is
writing to.
This patch allows the clients to start a new `llvm::Module`, allowing CodeGen
to continue wri
19 matches
Mail list logo
