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
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
