[LLVMdev] Union types

[Chris Lattner]

On Mar 29, 2010, at 7:15 AM, Tim Northover 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.

Thanks Tim, applied with a testcase here: 
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20100329/098758.html

> 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.

I don't think that anyone is really using them yet, which means that they probably have lots of little bugs like this.

-Chris