================
@@ -63,6 +65,12 @@ class Property<string storageTypeParam = "", string desc =
""> {
return convertFromAttribute($_storage, $_attr, $_diag);
}];
+ // The verification predicate for this property. Defaults to And<[]>,
+ // which is trivially true, since properties are always their expected type.
+ // Within the predicate, `$_self` is an instance of the **interface**
+ // type of the property.
+ Pred predicate = ?;
----------------
zero9178 wrote:
I thought about it some more and pros- and cons in my head are:
* If you want to optimize the TableGen code such that the code is less (using
the various `!if` constructs seen here), both `?` and `And<[]>` semantically
are just as capable as they can both be checked for (`!initialized` and `!eq`)
and special cased. Admittedly, I think that choosing `And<[]>` as the canonical
"true" representation is more arbitrary, but both are to an extent and it is
only for "readability of the outputted C++" optimization anyways. It could also
be mitigated by defining `defvar True = And<[]>`, making it more readable.
* The con of `?` is that it **requires** classes such as `Optional` to special
case `?`, while the `And<[]>` representation would not, making it purely an
opt-in optimization, and not a semantic requirement for composing properties.
Due to the last point I am therefore still leaning towards `And<[]>` as
default. I also think in an ideal world it is the backend emitter that would
optimize this but that is besides the point.
Would also love to hear other's opinion as I could live with the `?` default if
others feel more strongly about it.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/120176
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
