<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/09/2017 12:58 PM, Flamedoge
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAFPbgSbrsxfdch_Y4yeddVwr8MadHiyh7j7+WahE8jORpYP1JA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
      <div dir="ltr">As far as my limited understanding goes, this
        should be a bugfix (correctness) and it should trump backward
        compatibility requirement. It makes no sense to me to continue
        backward compatible incorrectness.</div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    The TBAA scheme is internally self-consistent and there are other
    (non-C/C++) frontends that are using it in a completely well-defined
    way. The bug, as such, is in the mapping between C/C++ and the TBAA
    metadata. That, indeed, we'll just change once we have something to
    target that can correctly represent the required semantics.<br>
    <br>
     -Hal<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAFPbgSbrsxfdch_Y4yeddVwr8MadHiyh7j7+WahE8jORpYP1JA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>Kevin</div>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Steven
          Perron via llvm-dev <span dir="ltr"><<a
              moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>></span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div class="m_8596073351940825992socmaildefaultfont"
              dir="ltr"
              style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10.5pt">
              <div dir="ltr">I could make something like Daniel's
                suggestion work.  The main question I still have is how
                we tell the difference between the "old-style" DAG and
                the "new-style" DAG?  I don't know if there is some
                standard way of doing this.  Do we just base it on the
                version of llvm-ir?</div>
              <div dir="ltr"> </div>
              <div dir="ltr">Would there be a need to maintain different
                code for both type of DAG?  If we change clang to
                generate the new-style DAG, things will be fine for
                C/C++.  However, will this force other components that
                generate llvm-ir to change?</div>
              <div dir="ltr"> </div>
              <div dir="ltr">In general, what kind of backwards
                compatibility do we need to keep?</div>
              <div dir="ltr"> </div>
              <div dir="ltr">Later,</div>
              <div dir="ltr">Steven Perron</div>
            </div>
            <br>
            <br>
            ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
            LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
            <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
            <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev"
              rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br>
            <br>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Hal Finkel
Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory</pre>
  </body>
</html>