Hi Andres, > I've comitted a (somewhat evolved) version of this patch. I think it > really improves the code! Awesome! Thanks for taking it forward!
> I do wonder about adding a variadic wrapper like the one introduced here > more widely, seems like it could simplify a number of places. If we then > redirected all function calls through a common wrapper, for LLVMBuildCall, > that also validated parameter count (and perhaps types), I think it'd be > easier to develop... +1. I was wondering whether such validations should be Asserts instead of ERRORs. Regards, Soumyadeep Chakraborty Senior Software Engineer Pivotal Greenplum Palo Alto On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:35 PM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > Hi, > > On 2019-10-28 23:58:11 -0700, Soumyadeep Chakraborty wrote: > > > Sorry for not replying to that earlier. I'm not quite sure it's > > > actually worthwhile doing so - did you try to measure any memory / cpu > > > savings? > > > > No problem, thanks for the reply! Unfortunately, I did not do anything > > significant in terms of mem/cpu measurements. However, I have noticed > > non-trivial differences between optimized and unoptimized .bc files > > that were dumped from time to time. > > Could you expand on what you mean here? Are you saying that you got > significantly better optimization results by doing function optimization > early on? That'd be surprising imo? > > Greetings, > > Andres Freund >
