[llvm-dev] "[NFC]" Abuse

[Luke Drummond via llvm-dev]

On Thu Jun 17, 2021 at 8:13 PM BST, John McCall wrote:
> Yeah, I expect NFC changes to be purely internal implementation
> details. Changing the public interface (even to add a feature)
> isn’t NFC; neither is anything that can affect output.
>
> There are a few places where LLVM does track global state that we
> don’t
> normally consider “output”. I think a change that created fewer
> llvm::ConstantExpr’s by, say, not generating a bitcast that only gets
> stripped/replaced a few cycles later would still count as NFC to me,
> since we don’t really consider the set of unused ConstantExprs to
> be output. But those are clarifications of the general rule, not
> exceptions.
>
This seems like a sensible balance to me.
> John.

-- 
Codeplay Software Ltd.
Company registered in England and Wales, number: 04567874
Registered office: Regent House, 316 Beulah Hill, London, SE19 3HF