The count attribute is more accurate with regards to the size of an array. It
also obviates the upper bound attribute in the subrange. We can also better
handle an unbound array by setting the count to -1 instead of the lower bound to
1 and upper bound to 0.
llvm-svn: 169312
The count field is necessary because there isn't a difference between the 'lo'
and 'hi' attributes for a one-element array and a zero-element array. When the
count is '0', we know that this is a zero-element array. When it's >=1, then
it's a normal constant sized array. When it's -1, then the array is unbounded.
llvm-svn: 169218
Sooooo many of these had incorrect or strange main module includes.
I have manually inspected all of these, and fixed the main module
include to be the nearest plausible thing I could find. If you own or
care about any of these source files, I encourage you to take some time
and check that these edits were sensible. I can't have broken anything
(I strictly added headers, and reordered them, never removed), but they
may not be the headers you'd really like to identify as containing the
API being implemented.
Many forward declarations and missing includes were added to a header
files to allow them to parse cleanly when included first. The main
module rule does in fact have its merits. =]
llvm-svn: 169131
If we have a type 'int a[1]' and a type 'int b[0]', the generated DWARF is the
same for both of them because we use the 'upper_bound' attribute. Instead use
the 'count' attrbute, which gives the correct number of elements in the array.
<rdar://problem/12566646>
llvm-svn: 167806
Add some support for dealing with an object pointer on arguments.
Part of rdar://9797999
which now supports adding the object pointer attribute to the
subprogram as it should.
llvm-svn: 163754
Bill Wendling