[LLVMdev] LLVMBuilder vs LLVMFoldingBuilder

[Dominic Hamon]

Duncan Sands wrote:
>> Another option that was discussed in #llvm is to nuke LLVMBuilder and 
>> rename LLVMFoldingBuilder to LLVMBuilder. If this was the case, I'd 
>> argue for a flag in the Builder that could retain the old non-folding 
>> functionality for debugging purposes.
>>     
>
> this plan sounds good to me.  However it's not clear to me how useful a
> debug flag would really be.
>
>   
I know that using the LLVMBuilder was useful to me in the early days of 
my work with LLVM to see exactly how the IR matched with what I expected 
it to given the input. It's only now that I'm working on global 
variables that require ConstantExpr types for initialisers that I 
started to use the LLVMFoldingBuilder.

I'll work on the patch and submit it here when it's ready.

Thanks