aeubanks added a comment. In D87216#2431508 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D87216#2431508>, @ychen wrote:
> It is very unfortunate that we have to manage and translate between two sets > of names (one pass name and one type name). This makes me wonder if we just > keep the pass name as the return value of PassInfoMixin::name and get rid of > class name everywhere. Right now I couldn't think of anything is blocking us > from doing that. WDYT? @asbirlea ? We'd have to move the names from PassRegistry.def to every pass class definition which would be a lot of work but definitely feasible. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87216/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87216 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
