Skip to content

[sil-serialization] Create SILSerializationFunctionBuilder and use it… #18445

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conversation

gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor

@gottesmm gottesmm commented Aug 1, 2018

… when deserializing.

This allowed me to fold all of the weird direct calls to createFunction into a
singular SILSerializationFunctionBuilder::createDeclaration. This is the only
API that is needed by the SILParser so only providing that gives us a
significantly cleaner API.

rdar://42301529

@gottesmm gottesmm requested a review from shajrawi August 1, 2018 17:26
@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Aug 1, 2018

@swift-ci smoke test and merge

Copy link

@shajrawi shajrawi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The idea itself looks good, but it doesn't compile as-is, need to fix that:

/home/buildnode/jenkins/workspace/swift-PR-Linux-smoke-test/branch-master/swift/lib/Serialization/SILSerializationFunctionBuilder.h:32:25: error: use of undeclared identifier 'sourceLoc'
12:52:25         RegularLocation(sourceLoc), IsNotBare, IsNotTransparent,
12:52:25                         ^
12:52:25 /home/buildnode/jenkins/workspace/swift-PR-Linux-smoke-test/branch-master/swift/lib/Serialization/DeserializeSIL.cpp:555:9: error: no member named 'setIsThunk' in 'swift::SILFunction'; did you mean 'setThunk'?

@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Aug 1, 2018

Oops.

… when deserializing.

This allowed me to fold all of the weird direct calls to createFunction into a
singular SILSerializationFunctionBuilder::createDeclaration. This is the only
API that is needed by the SILParser so only providing that gives us a
significantly cleaner API.

rdar://42301529
@gottesmm gottesmm force-pushed the pr-9dbfa583dcd9d9142811cf110463cc6459d0cac1 branch from f338f18 to 72d3323 Compare August 1, 2018 20:04
@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Aug 1, 2018

Lets try this again.

@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Aug 1, 2018

@swift-ci smoke test and merge

3 similar comments
@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Aug 1, 2018

@swift-ci smoke test and merge

@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Aug 1, 2018

@swift-ci smoke test and merge

@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Aug 1, 2018

@swift-ci smoke test and merge

@swift-ci swift-ci merged commit 1a1f174 into swiftlang:master Aug 1, 2018
@gottesmm gottesmm deleted the pr-9dbfa583dcd9d9142811cf110463cc6459d0cac1 branch August 8, 2018 18:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants