[llvm-dev] Arguments name IR LLVM

[Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev]

I don't think it makes the grammar ambiguous, so it seems like it could be
fixed.

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:32 AM Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at quicinc.com>
wrote:

> Bitcode parser doesn’t like “numerical” names for parameters:
>
> opt: <stdin>:1:22: error: expected ')' at end of argument list
> define void @foo(i32 %0) {
>                      ^
>
> --
> Krzysztof Parzyszek  mailto:kparzysz at quicinc.com   AI tools development
>
> From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Reid
> Kleckner via llvm-dev
> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 1:14 PM
> To: Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org>
> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; mohamed messelka <m14m at live.fr>
> Subject: [EXT] Re: [llvm-dev] Arguments name IR LLVM
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 4:39 AM Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev <mailto:
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> The arguments are unnamed, which means they will be implicitly named %0,
> %1, %2.
>
> OP's use case for the names aside, I think we should consider changing
> LLVM's IR printer to print unnamed arguments in function definitions as %0,
> %1, etc, like we do for instructions. We can skip the names for Function
> declarations since nothing can refer to them, but it's confusing to see %0
> references with no definition. Unnamed BBs are another common source of
> confusion, but I'd leave that alone for now.
>
> Reid
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190729/4bb14513/attachment.html>