It is a good idea to do as much matching inside of match() as possible.
If some checking is done afterwards, and we don't fold because of it,
chances are we may have missed some commutative pattern.
Details
Details
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rL LLVM
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Do we have an upcoming/existing use case for this?
unittests/IR/PatternMatch.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
112 ↗ | (On Diff #207411) | Maybe test a INT_MIN style value? That should return true for both? |
Comment Actions
Likewise, this is needed in a followup patch.
unittests/IR/PatternMatch.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
112 ↗ | (On Diff #207411) | Will do. |
Comment Actions
I'm not doing anything here because i don't need this before i post the patch that actually uses this,
and i'm not posting that patch until i can post all of it's prerequisite patches, because otherwise
i will have one more patch up for review, thus increasing review queue even further, and lately
that queue seems to be rather completely stale.
llvm/unittests/IR/PatternMatch.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
485 ↗ | (On Diff #209730) | Why is CNegIntMin negating C128 rather than CIntMin? |