[llvm-dev] InstNamer numbering question

[Justin Bogner via llvm-dev]

Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
> What is the reason behind LLVM verifying that the instNamer numbering be
> incremental?
>
> For example, it would be nice to be able to edit the IR and run through llc
> without having to propagate the numbering. it's possible to still have it
> ordered without being incremental.
>
> Is this just a diffing issue?

I don't know the answer to your question offhand, but if you're trying
to hand edit IR you can always run `opt -instnamer` on some IR to get a
version where all of the instructions are named. That will avoid the
issue.