[llvm-dev] Should Verifier be an analysis?

[Hal Finkel via llvm-dev]

On 07/12/2018 01:50 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev wrote:
> On 7/12/2018 1:05 PM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev wrote:
>> This I can definitely understand, but to this end, maybe we should
>> have a setup where -print-after-all just doesn't reprint IR if the
>> previous pass didn't change anything?
>
> It can be helpful to see what passes actually ran, even if they didn't
> change anything.  Maybe we could have another option, like
> -print-after-changes?

I agree. What I had in mind was that the pass name itself would still
print, but we'd print "[unchanged]", or similar, instead of the IR in
cases where the IR didn't change. I'd also be happy with a separate
option (which we'd need anyway, especially because sometimes passes
incorrectly claim not to have changed the IR, and that might be the
problem you're debugging).

 -Hal

>
> -Krzysztof
>

-- 
Hal Finkel
Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory