[llvm-commits] [llvm] r87028 - /llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Value.h

[Evan Cheng]

Do we really want to differentiate FixedStackPseudoSourceValueVal as a distinct subclass at the IR level? This seems wrong to me.

Evan

On Nov 12, 2009, at 1:04 PM, David Greene wrote:

> Author: greened
> Date: Thu Nov 12 15:04:19 2009
> New Revision: 87028
> 
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=87028&view=rev
> Log:
> 
> Fix a build error by providing a missing enum value.
> 
> Modified:
>    llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Value.h
> 
> Modified: llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Value.h
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Value.h?rev=87028&r1=87027&r2=87028&view=diff
> 
> ==============================================================================
> --- llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Value.h (original)
> +++ llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Value.h Thu Nov 12 15:04:19 2009
> @@ -226,7 +226,9 @@
>     PseudoSourceValueVal,     // This is an instance of PseudoSourceValue
>     FixedStackPseudoSourceValueVal, // This is an instance of PseudoSourceValue
>     InstructionVal,           // This is an instance of Instruction
> -    
> +    FixedStackPseudoSourceValueVal, // This is an instance of 
> +                                    // FixedStackPseudoSourceValue
> +
>     // Markers:
>     ConstantFirstVal = FunctionVal,
>     ConstantLastVal  = ConstantPointerNullVal
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits