[PATCH] Debug info: Cleanup collectChangingRegs

[Frédéric Riss]

On 06 Aug 2014, at 19:50, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Is there
>>> some more general test we can do here that would catch more cases of
>>> MIs that don't have register definitions? (to have a bigger impact and
>>> make the intent of the code clearer - it's not about skipping debug
>>> values, it's about skipping non-defining instructions)
>> 
>> That’s a question I asked myself. If this test exists, then it could go into calculateDbgValueHistory also to get bigger impact.
> 
> Yeah - then it seems weird to have it out here. Just makes the reader
> ask more questions, I think. Either it matters and it should be in
> calculateDbgValueHistory, as you say, or it doesn't and it shouldn't
> be anywhere because it's just adding cognitive load for readers...
> 
> I'd just suggest dropping that (& pestering Alexey about why it was in
> the other place too).

Well, in calculateDbgValueHistory the test has to be there as the loop is meant to handle DbgValue instructions specifically.

Fred
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140806/175612e8/attachment.html>