[llvm-dev] The undef story

[Peter Lawrence via llvm-dev]

Chandler,
               Al right then, stay on topic, what do you actually think
should be done about the fact that the current proposal will mis-compile
the function-inlining example, and won’t be able to hoist a loop-invariat
divide out of a loop.

Peter Lawrence.



> On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:03 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:53 PM Peter Lawrence <peterl95124 at sbcglobal.net <mailto:peterl95124 at sbcglobal.net>> wrote:
> >
> > Having read all of these threads, I am thoroughly convinced by the positions put forward by others.
> >
> 
> Chandler,
>                others have decided to let the compiler continue mis-compiling the
> function-inlining example, others have decided to not fix the inability to hoist
> a loop invariant divide out of a loop. It sounds like you haven’t even thought
> about these things let alone be convinced by anything.  Am I missing something
> or have you forgotten what we are talking about here ?
> 
> Please stop with (what I can only interpret as) personal attacks. I haven't forgotten what we are talking about.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170628/cda1eec9/attachment.html>