[PATCH] D77817: [llvm][NFC] Replace CallSite with CallBase in Inliner

[David Blaikie via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

dblaikie added a comment.

In D77817#1972599 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D77817#1972599>, @davidxl wrote:

> What is the convention here? Pointer CallBase* vs CallBase& ?


I'd say "Same as other llvm::Instructions" - and I /assume/ the answer there is that they're still predominantly handled as pointers, rather than references?

Seems for /literally/ Instruction*/Instruction& (as opposed to all possible types of Instructions - harder to search/gather data for all of them) it's about 7:1 in favor of *, but that's hard to evaluate/compare - some of those may need to be pointers because null is an option.

Evidently references to Instructions aren't totally unheard of, so the preference "use references when something can't be null" could be observed here. A pretty clear endorsement of this is that "instructions(F)" gives you an iterator over Instruction&, not over Instruction*.

But yeah - given the current codebase I think it's dealer's choice & not something I'd push strongly either way in review personally. (but I don't do lots of Instruction handling, so maybe some other folks have stronger ideas about which direction this sort of thing should be going in)


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D77817/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D77817