-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 166
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
Enable llvm tests for symbolics #2430
Conversation
Ready! |
@@ -1267,6 +1267,7 @@ namespace LCompilers { | |||
break; | |||
} | |||
case (ASR::ttypeType::CPtr) : { | |||
a_kind = 8; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Previously, we used a_kind = 4
, but now I set 8
to be default, this is required for Symbolic as we use i64
pointer for CPtr
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I thought CPtr doesn't have a kind?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems the list[CPtr]
uses a_kind
to decide malloc_size
.
Is this a bug?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I went through the changes and the changes do work in the correct direction. If we could know whether a_kind
would be required or not for list[CPtr]
, the PR can be finished accordingly .
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc @certik
Could you clarify Thirumalai's comment here? I think this is close to completion once we have an idea for the same.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is good for now, it enables several tests and the changes are small and seem clean. I do not understand the design of a kind for CPtr
, but that's a separate question. So I think we can merge this.
No description provided.