[LLVMdev] Union types

Talin viridia at gmail.com
Fri Apr 30 12:41:55 PDT 2010

BTW, I don't know if I mentioned this but thank you for the patch. Do you
know if you will be doing any further work on unions? I'm trying to decide /
understand what to work on next - unfortunately I'm not all that familiar
with the LLVM backends and code generators, I'm mostly a front end guy. :)

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Tim Northover
<T.P.Northover at sms.ed.ac.uk>wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 01:15:30PM +0100, Renato Golin wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Which implies no one was expecting a UnionType there...
> >
> > Also, if I generate the object code directly, llc fails too...
> >
> > Is there any plan to implement the union type? The work-around is quite
> ugly...
> Sorry to Renato for getting two copeis of this, I cocked up the reply
> first time.
> Anyway, here's a patch for this issue (I'd not tried zero initialiser
> during my work). It seems to pass all the same tests as llvm did before,
> and give reasonable output.
> Also, does anyone know off the top of their heads what would be needed
> to get unions up to scratch? They do seem to be a neat solution and I'd
> be sad to see them removed.
> Tim.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

-- Talin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100430/bb2d8906/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list