erichkeane added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/Builtins.def:658 BUILTIN(__builtin_call_with_static_chain, "v.", "nt") +BUILTIN(__builtin_nondet, "v.", "nt") ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > shafik wrote: > > > erichkeane wrote: > > > > Not a fan of the name in general, it doesn't really explain what is > > > > happening. Perhaps `__builtin_nondeterministic_value` or something? > > > > > > > > I also wonder if others might have a better name :) > > > `__builtin_indeterminate_value` wdyt? > > I think `__builtin_unspecified_value()` makes sense, as that's what you're > > getting back (there is a valid value, but you may get a different value on > > every call). I don't think `indeterminate` makes sense because that implies > > it may return trap values, and I'm guessing that's not behavior we want > > here (or am I wrong about that)? > > > > Also, should this be usable within a constant expression? I would assume > > not; we should have a test case showing you can't use it in such a context. > Why does this require custom typechecking? Our issue last time with "unspecified" value was that this has a distinct meaning in C/C++, so we don't want to use that word. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D142388/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D142388 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
