- User Since
- Nov 16 2017, 6:22 PM (92 w, 1 d)
Jun 24 2019
This looks great! Thanks.
Jun 19 2019
Awesome patch. I'm cool with this as long as Simon's comments are addressed.
Jun 11 2019
Thanks for the patch @Maxpm! Can we close PR42173? Is there anything left for that ticket?
Jun 10 2019
May 9 2019
May 8 2019
This looks nice! We should probably also have a test for the case where a user specifies an END before a BEGIN tag.
Apr 22 2019
Apr 19 2019
Thanks for the review, I addressed your comments:
- Removed the reference, and pass the AST node as a pointer.
- Made a few decls auto
Apr 17 2019
Apr 2 2019
LGTM, I'll let @jhenderson weigh-in to see what he says.
LGTM, as long as @rupprecht's comment is addressed.
Apr 1 2019
Mar 30 2019
Mar 28 2019
Mar 22 2019
Mar 13 2019
Mar 7 2019
Makes sense. LGTM.
Mar 1 2019
Thanks for the reviews everyone. This update addresses the feedback, all of which was incorporated.
Feb 28 2019
Feb 27 2019
I like this and think users will find it very helpful. The changes seem sensible to me; however, I had a few nits... mostly stylistic things, no big deals. Anyways, I'll mark this patch as accept, as long as you cover the suggestions made by @lebedev.ri.
- Fixed the test case (removed underscore typo, and extraneous shstrtab test).
- Emit ANDROID_REL ANDROID_RELA instead of section offsets.
- Modified the range check, allowing us to remove some now redundant code for printing the lower-bound section names.
Feb 26 2019
- Added a more complicated test.
- Made a few variables 'auto' instead of their iterator type.
Feb 20 2019
LGTM. Thanks for adding these.
Feb 19 2019
Feb 18 2019
Feb 14 2019
Feb 12 2019
Feb 11 2019
LGTM. I had a few suggestions but nothing looks wrong to me.
Feb 7 2019
I've updated the patch to replicate GNU's c++filt behavior. This patch now only splits strings that are passed via stdin. It does not split strings that are passed as arguments to llvm-cxxfilt via command line.
Feb 6 2019
The test case in your patch definitely causes a problem, but that's because the -start-before/-stop-after is used. If I run that same test through llc, the UnreachableBlockElim pass kicks-in and drops the dead code.
I took a look at the code in your Janurary 24th comment. I was unable to get the same dead block to surface, but most likely I had the wrong flag set. How did you build the sample in that comment?