[llvm-commits] [llvm] r42822 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/SelectionDAG.h lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeDAG.cpp lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAG.cpp lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCISelLowering.cpp lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCISelLowering.h lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCInstrFormats.td lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCInstrInfo.td

[Dale Johannesen]

On Oct 10, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Evan Cheng wrote:
>>>> --- llvm/trunk/include/llvm/CodeGen/SelectionDAG.h (original)
>>>> +++ llvm/trunk/include/llvm/CodeGen/SelectionDAG.h Tue Oct  9
>>>> 20:01:31 2007
>>>> @@ -403,6 +403,8 @@
>>>>    SDNode *getTargetNode(unsigned Opcode, MVT::ValueType VT,
>>>>                          const SDOperand *Ops, unsigned NumOps);
>>>>    SDNode *getTargetNode(unsigned Opcode, MVT::ValueType VT1,
>>>> +                        MVT::ValueType VT2);
>>>> +  SDNode *getTargetNode(unsigned Opcode, MVT::ValueType VT1,
>>>>                          MVT::ValueType VT2, SDOperand Op1);
>>>
>>> This seems unnecessary. You can use this variant:
>>>    SDNode *getTargetNode(unsigned Opcode, MVT::ValueType VT1,
>>>                          MVT::ValueType VT2,
>>>                          const SDOperand *Ops, unsigned NumOps);
>>
>> It's not me using it, it's tablegen.  I could change that as you
>> suggest but
>> this seems simpler.  No good reason not to support it, is there?
>
> Ah ok. I'll fix it then. Please file a bug so I remember it. :-)

OK, I guess, but I don't see what's wrong with this way.