[cfe-dev] [RFC] MS-style inline assembly

[João Matos]

>
> I'm not sure we would want to store the MCInst(s) in the AST.  After we're
> done with semantic checking and we've created the IR representation (with
> inputs, outputs, clobbers, constraints, etc.), I don't think there's a
> reason for the MCInst(s) to persist.
>

I was assuming that MCInst would already provide a lot of the needed
information, like operands and opcode information. Now that I think about
it, we do want to have an higher-level information in the AST. For
instance, pointers to the variable or label declarations referenced in the
assembly code.


-- 
João Matos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20120806/52be38e7/attachment.html>