[LLVMdev] Some additions to the C bindings

[Kenneth Uildriks]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 11, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Kenneth Uildriks wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Isn't LLVMHasInitializer just  LLVMGetInitializer(x) != 0?
>>
>> Last time I tried that, LLVMGetInitializer threw an assertion when the
>> global variable didn't actually have one.  Has this changed?
>
> No idea.  It would be more C like to return null.  The C implementation of
> the function can check and return null if not set.
>
>> I was following the pattern of Functions, Globals, etc., where you get
>> a Use* (not a use_iterator), and then pass it back to a GetNextUse
>> call, which turns it back into an iterator and advances it.
>
> Conceptually you're returning an iterator.  It happens to be implemented as
> a tight wrapper around the Use.
>>
>> So you want the whole patch, or just the pieces you highlighted?
>
> Please resend an updated patch (the whole thing)
>
> -Chris
>

All right.  You should see it by tonight.