WIP: Layout #7812
Closed
WIP: Layout #7812
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rtfeldman
force-pushed
the
layout
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a14aaa9 to
360ed6f
Compare
This reverts commit 34bdcbb.
rtfeldman
force-pushed
the
layout
branch
6 times, most recently
from
148c6f9 to
7501318
Compare
|
Closing in favor of #7844 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
WIP because I need to review and revise this a bunch. I'm not going to try to do all the types in one PR (this is big enough as-is!) but I did want to get records in there so we can start thinking about layouts involving zero-sized types (e.g. zero-sized record fields need to get dropped).
Even if we aren't monomorphizing our canonical IR, we still need to be able to go from types to Layouts so that the interpreter can know what layouts the host expects, and also in the future for LLVM code gen in general.