introduce a common superclass, SILNode.
This is in preparation for allowing instructions to have multiple
results. It is also a somewhat more elegant representation for
instructions that have zero results. Instructions that are known
to have exactly one result inherit from a class, SingleValueInstruction,
that subclasses both ValueBase and SILInstruction. Some care must be
taken when working with SILNode pointers and testing for equality;
please see the comment on SILNode for more information.
A number of SIL passes needed to be updated in order to handle this
new distinction between SIL values and SIL instructions.
Note that the SIL parser is now stricter about not trying to assign
a result value from an instruction (like 'return' or 'strong_retain')
that does not produce any.
In raw SIL, access markers are unconditionally retained. In canonical SIL,
markers are still removed prior to optimization.
A new flag, -sil-optimized-access-markers, allows testing access markers in
optimized builds, but it is not yet fully supported.
AccessMarkerElimination now registers a callback so that any subsequently
deserialized function bodies will have access markers stripped for optimization.
rdar:31908496 Assertion failed: (isa<X>(Val) && "cast<Ty>() argument of
incompatible type!") in SILPerformanceInliner
LLVM's ilist::erase is actually correct. It just implements a nonstandard remove
method that modifies it's iterator argument.
I forgot to add "continue" statements when fixing the iterator-invalidation problem.
I reversed this loop's direction over the instruction list and forgot to change
the order of erasing an instruction with respect to advancing the iterator.
Thankfully ASAN is far smarter than I.
Converting between forward/reverse iterators makes the loop unreadable.
Add an iterator return value to BasicBlock::erase(SILInstruction*).
