llvm: lower tagged union payload as byte array #21354
Open
+41
−40
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
will this impact seeing union tags and payloads in a debugger? |
|
No, this is not related to debug info. |
At this point, I feel more comfortable with this lowering than I do further complicating this type lowering logic. I do wonder whether we ought to start lowering other types as byte arrays, and using byte-level GOPs -- it would make lowering less error-prone, and I highly doubt would actually hinder LLVM's ability to optimize. We now always lower (non-packed) union values using the ptrcast path, since the payload is always represented using a byte array. Resolves: ziglang#21343
mlugg
force-pushed
the
llvm-union-payload
branch
from
60abf63
to
4c0b34c
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
At this point, I feel more comfortable with this lowering than I do further complicating this type lowering logic. I do wonder whether we ought to start lowering other types as byte arrays, and using byte-level GEPs -- it would make lowering less error-prone, and I highly doubt would actually hinder LLVM's ability to optimize.
Resolves: #21343