Very true. We should discuss this more, but my reasoning is more of a
consistency argument. There are VERY few instructions that can have all
-of the types eliminated, and doing so when available unnecesarily makes
+of the types eliminated, and doing so when available unnecessarily makes
the language more difficult to handle. Especially when you see 'int
%this' and 'bool %that' all over the place, I think it would be
disorienting to see:
No. This was something I was debating for a while, and didn't really feel
strongly about either way. It is common to switch on other types in HLL's
-(for example signed int's are particually common), but in this case, all
+(for example signed int's are particularly common), but in this case, all
that will be added is an additional 'cast' instruction. I removed that
from the spec.
Conditional move is effectly a special case of a predicated
instruction... and I think that all predicated instructions can possibly
be implemented later in LLVM. It would significantly change things, and
-it doesn't seem to be very neccesary right now. It would seem to
+it doesn't seem to be very necessary right now. It would seem to
complicate flow control analysis a LOT in the virtual machine. I would
tend to prefer that a predicated architecture like IA64 convert from a
"basic block" representation to a predicated rep as part of it's dynamic
> I agree that we need a static data space. Otherwise, emulating global
> data gets unnecessarily complex.
-Definately. Also a later item though. :)
+Definitely. Also a later item though. :)
> We once talked about adding a symbolic thread-id field to each
> ..
projects / oota-llvm.git / blobdiff