David Blaikie 5e2e6f2855 [opaque pointer type] bitcode support for explicit type parameter to the load instruction ... Summary: I've taken my best guess at this, but I've cargo culted in places & so explanations/corrections would be great. This seems to pass all the tests (check-all, covering clang and llvm) so I believe that pretty well exercises both the backwards compatibility and common (same version) compatibility given the number of checked in bitcode files we already have. Is that a reasonable approach to testing here? Would some more explicit tests be desired? 1) is this the right way to do back-compat in this case (looking at the number of entries in the bitcode record to disambiguate between the old schema and the new?) 2) I don't quite understand the logarithm logic to choose the encoding type of the type parameter in the abbreviation description, but I found another instruction doing the same thing & it seems to work. Is that the right approach? Reviewers: dexonsmith Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7655 git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@230414 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8		2015-02-25 01:07:20 +00:00
..
BitcodeWriter.cpp	[opaque pointer type] bitcode support for explicit type parameter to the load instruction	2015-02-25 01:07:20 +00:00
BitcodeWriterPass.cpp	[PM] Switch the new pass manager to use a reference-based API for IR	2015-01-05 02:47:05 +00:00
BitWriter.cpp
CMakeLists.txt
LLVMBuild.txt
Makefile
ValueEnumerator.cpp	BitcodeWriter: Refactor common computation of bits required for a type index.	2015-02-25 00:51:52 +00:00
ValueEnumerator.h	BitcodeWriter: Refactor common computation of bits required for a type index.	2015-02-25 00:51:52 +00:00