[PATCH] D18367: Introduce llvm.load.relative intrinsic.

[John McCall via llvm-commits]

rjmccall added a comment.

Actually, I don't understand why the overloading is done the way it is.  Are you planning to store v-table entries relative to the v-table's address point rather than the address of the slot?  Even if so, can't that sort of further adjustment be trivially done by the caller instead of baking it into the intrinsic?

I think it would be simpler to have a llvm.load.relative.iN that assumes an iN relative offset and doesn't take an explicit second operand.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D18367