[LLVMdev] LLVMBuilder vs LLVMFoldingBuilder

Dominic Hamon dom.hamon at gmail.com
Thu Apr 3 04:30:04 PDT 2008

Duncan Sands wrote:
>> Another option that was discussed in #llvm is to nuke LLVMBuilder and 
>> rename LLVMFoldingBuilder to LLVMBuilder. If this was the case, I'd 
>> argue for a flag in the Builder that could retain the old non-folding 
>> functionality for debugging purposes.
> this plan sounds good to me.  However it's not clear to me how useful a
> debug flag would really be.
I know that using the LLVMBuilder was useful to me in the early days of 
my work with LLVM to see exactly how the IR matched with what I expected 
it to given the input. It's only now that I'm working on global 
variables that require ConstantExpr types for initialisers that I 
started to use the LLVMFoldingBuilder.

I'll work on the patch and submit it here when it's ready.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list