lebedev.ri added a comment. In D64931#1622144 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64931#1622144>, @akhuang wrote:
> > Can you post a reproducer? > > Turns out I just didn't have assertions enabled. With assertions the changed > test cases should fail. > > > I think this is precisely what was discussed in replies to RFC - this > > hardcodes these address spaces, and thus either makes them unavaliable for > > other front-ends and/or forces them to use them with Precisely Same Meaning. > > It seems like the RFC replies agreed that this should be implemented with > address spaces, and that the information for these is encoded in the data > layout. Yes, *in front-end*. `llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86TargetMachine.cpp` is *not* front-end, therefore > In D64931#1622039 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64931#1622039>, @lebedev.ri > wrote: > >> this hardcodes these address spaces, and thus either makes them unavaliable >> for other front-ends and/or forces them to use them with Precisely Same >> Meaning. In D64931#1622144 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64931#1622144>, @akhuang wrote: > I think there was some confusion as to whether there would be more changes in > addition to the data layout change? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64931/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64931 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
