[LLVMdev] type-system-rewrite branch landing tomorrow

[Chris Lattner]

I'm sorry, I've been away from the computer. I'll investigate this in the next half hour.  Thanks for the test cases!

-Chris

On Jul 9, 2011, at 3:27 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2011/7/9 Rafael Ávila de Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com>:
>>> It looks like we need to have opaque function types? Or we need to defer
>>> emission of some types until we've finished the translation unit.
>> 
>> We were deferring this before, no? We could not produce a function type
>> taking an opaque type. Once it go resolved we would need to revisit the
>> function type.
>> 
>> Maybe it is just the logic for delaying it that got broken in the
>> transition?
> 
> What we were doing before is that if a function type depended on an
> incomplete type, the function type itself was made opaque, and
> subsequently resolved when the type(s) it depended on were completed.
> I haven't looked at the committed version closely, but the draft
> patches basically ripped out that code because the approach was
> unworkable.
> 
> -Eli
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev