[llvm-dev] Need help with code generation

[Tim Northover via llvm-dev]

> My understanding is that clang and llvm themselves are designed this way
> (crash when the unexpected happens).

I don't think so. I'd view any Clang crash as a bug (probably to be
prioritised below silent CodeGen and many others, but not "working as
designed").

> For example the fact that clang forks itself to be able to report diagnostics

That seems like just trying to make our own job easier to me. I think
the entire point of the fork is to get a backtrace we can fix, and
point out where the user should send it.

> llvm is full of report_fatal_error() (or worse, assertions that can fire on unexpected user input).

A bit of a grey area since LLVM isn't itself a user-facing tool, but I
think I'd still say that a report_fatal_error that's not actionable by
the user is actually an LLVM bug. And a segfault definitely so.

Cheers.

Tim.