<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Apr 23, 2012, at 5:57 AM, Lyu Mitnick wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_extra">Hello Chris<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><div class="h5">
<div><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>The general concept is to replace void with {}. Void is a weird type in that it is only allowed as the return value of functions and as the type of instructions like store. It seems better (though also not particularly high priority) to eliminate it to make the type system more consistent.</div>
<span></span></div>
</blockquote></div><span class="HOEnZb"></span></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div></blockquote><br><div>MVT::isVoid </div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>MVT is separate from the LLVM IR type system, I would not change it.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>and Type::VoidTyID </div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>VoidTyID should go away, since there is no more distinct Void type anymore.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>(getVoidTy) have equivalent relation in LLVM.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>For API continuity, Type::getVoidTy() should still exist, but it should return {}.</div><div><br></div>-Chris</div><br></body></html>