================
@@ -2707,6 +2707,98 @@ def CIR_CallOp : CIR_CallOpBase<"call",
[NoRegionArguments]> {
];
}
+def CIR_TryCallOp : CIR_CallOpBase<"try_call",[
+ DeclareOpInterfaceMethods<BranchOpInterface>,
+ Terminator, AttrSizedOperandSegments
+]> {
+ let summary = "try_call operation";
+
+ let description = [{
+ Mostly similar to cir.call but requires two destination
+ branches, one for handling exceptions in case its thrown and
+ the other one to follow on regular control-flow.
+
+ Example:
+
+ ```mlir
+ // Direct call
+ %result = cir.try_call @division(%a, %b) ^continue, ^landing_pad
+ : (f32, f32) -> f32
+ ```
+ }];
+
+ let arguments = !con((ins
+ Variadic<CIR_AnyType>:$contOperands,
+ Variadic<CIR_AnyType>:$landingPadOperands
----------------
AmrDeveloper wrote:
They are arguments for the destinations, similar to what we have in BrCond when
we pass the exception to pass it to another block. I can't see any case in
TryCallOp that needs operands for destinations, but confirm the
BranchOpInterface we need to have them to not lose some verification for now 🤔.
I was thinking of keeping them in the op but ignore them from builder, parser,
and printer until we need them or if we realize we will not need them in the
future, we can copy the verify to TryCallOp itself and remove those operands 🤔,
what do you think?
@andykaylor @bcardosolopes
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/165303
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
