[LLVMdev] RFA: tree-nested.c

Bill Wendling isanbard at gmail.com
Wed Nov 26 01:17:23 PST 2008

On Nov 26, 2008, at 12:14 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:

>> What are the assumptions going into this "walk_all_functions" call?
>> Should the code have been placed into some nesting info slot or
>> something?
> Hi Bill, should I think about this or is it fixed already?
Hi Duncan,

I put a fix in there, and I think that it's correct, but would like a  
second opinion.

 From what I could gather, a "block helper" function is synthesized on  
the fly. There are a few places in the code base, that work on nested  
functions, where these functions are explicitly excluded. (My  
understanding is that they "look" like nested functions during  
processing. But once they are created, the helper function can be used  
in more than one function. Indeed, that was the behavior I was seeing  
in tree-nested.c.) I simply excluded them from the LLVM-specific code  
in tree-nested.c.

What is that code doing? Is there a way to test it if I did something  


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list