[LLVMdev] RFA: tree-nested.c
Bill Wendling
isanbard at gmail.com
Wed Nov 26 01:17:23 PST 2008
On Nov 26, 2008, at 12:14 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
>> What are the assumptions going into this "walk_all_functions" call?
>> Should the code have been placed into some nesting info slot or
>> something?
>
> Hi Bill, should I think about this or is it fixed already?
>
Hi Duncan,
I put a fix in there, and I think that it's correct, but would like a
second opinion.
From what I could gather, a "block helper" function is synthesized on
the fly. There are a few places in the code base, that work on nested
functions, where these functions are explicitly excluded. (My
understanding is that they "look" like nested functions during
processing. But once they are created, the helper function can be used
in more than one function. Indeed, that was the behavior I was seeing
in tree-nested.c.) I simply excluded them from the LLVM-specific code
in tree-nested.c.
What is that code doing? Is there a way to test it if I did something
wrong?
-bw
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list