[LLVMdev] Troubling promotion of return value to Integer ...

Chris Lattner sabre at nondot.org
Tue Jun 10 23:01:18 PDT 2008

On Jun 10, 2008, at 2:36 PM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com 
 > wrote:

> Going that route, and with 64 bit processors picking up, I'm sure soon
> we will have to add two more new attributes:
> sign_ext_from_i32 and zero_ext_from_i32
> which makes the number of attributes 8 (i1,i8,i16,i32) rather than 4
> (i8,i16)
> Is this exactly what is desired? From one perspective it is good  
> because
> it doesn't require too much modification. On the other hand the way  
> that
> attributes are designed does not allow much flexibility and I'm sure  
> in
> future the same kind of discussion, but about some other attribute,  
> will
> pop up on this email list...

It really depends on how much you want to do.  If you're interested in  
doing the work to make attributes parameterized, it is clearly the  
right way to go.  If you're not interested in that, adding 8  
attributes on demand is ok.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list