hfinkel added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53157#1291977, @andrew.w.kaylor wrote:
> Craig Topper also raised some concerns with me (in person, his desk is right > by mine) about the potential effect this might have on code size. He tells me > that IRBuilder calls are intended to always be inlined and if we grow the > implementation of these functions too much it could lead to noticeable bloat. > It still seems to me like it might be worthwhile for the simplification it > would allow in the front end, but I'm not really a front end guy so I > definitely agree that we should get some input from front end people about > what they want. Craig's right about not wanting to bloat the inlinable functions in IRBuilder, but this is something that we can measure. In addition, we might be able to move the "slow path" (which create the constrained intrinsics) to the .cpp file (by manually outlining to a different function). https://reviews.llvm.org/D53157 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
