rjmccall added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprComplex.cpp:609
+ ComplexPairTy Op;
+ PromotionType = getPromotionType(E->getSubExpr()->getType());
+ if (!PromotionType.isNull())
----------------
zahiraam wrote:
> rjmccall wrote:
> > This is overwriting the argument, so the code below doesn't understand
> > whether it's supposed to be emitting a promoted result or not. You can
> > test this with something like:
> >
> > ```
> > cf16 = -cf16;
> > ```
> >
> > Here the context does not want a promoted result, but you will produce one
> > anyway.
> >
> > Because this operator does its own arithmetic, like the binary operators,
> > it needs to follow the same basic logic:
> > - remember whether you're supposed to emit a promoted result
> > - if not, check whether you should do the arithmetic promoted anyway
> > - if you did the arithmetic promoted, but you're not supposed to emit a
> > promoted result, unpromote the result
>
> So something like this:
>
> #define HANDLEUNOP(OP)
> \
> Value *VisitUnary##OP(const UnaryOperator *E,
> \
> QualType PromotionType = QualType()) {
> \
> QualType promotionTy = getPromotionType(E->getSubExpr()->getType());
> \
> llvvm::Value *result = **Visit##OP**(E, promotionTy);
> \
> result = EmitUnpromotion(promotionTy, E, result);
> }
> HANDLEUNOP(Minus)
> HANDLEUNOP(Plus)
> HANDLEUNOP(Imag)
> HANDLEUNOP(Reg)
> #undef HANDLEUNOP
>
> Where Visit##* are the bodies taken from the current VisitUnary*?
You should only unpromote if `PromotionType` was null, but yes, that's the
idea. I don't think you should macro it, though.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D113107/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D113107
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
