arsenm added a comment. In D151087#4360695 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D151087#4360695>, @jhuber6 wrote:
> I don't think that's something we can diagnose here with just the address > space number. it would require information from the underlying target for the > expected pointer qualities to the address space. Yes, this is mandatory. Numbered address spaces are broken and just work by accident and I don't love seeing new code rely on whatever random behavior they have now. Right now they happen to codegen to something that appears to work, while bypassing any kind of sensible semantic checking for what you're doing with them. If you want to really use this, we need to find some way to map numbers back into language address spaces and make them fully aware of the target properties Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D151087/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D151087 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
