Re: WIP: expression evaluation improvements

Hi Andres,
> I've comitted a (somewhat evolved) version of this patch. I think it
> really improves the code!
Awesome! Thanks for taking it forward!

> I do wonder about adding a variadic wrapper like the one introduced here
> more widely, seems like it could simplify a number of places. If we then
> redirected all function calls through a common wrapper, for LLVMBuildCall,
> that also validated parameter count (and perhaps types), I think it'd be
> easier to develop...
+1. I was wondering whether such validations should be Asserts instead of
ERRORs.

Regards,

Soumyadeep Chakraborty
Senior Software Engineer
Pivotal Greenplum
Palo Alto

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:35 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2019-10-28 23:58:11 -0700, Soumyadeep Chakraborty wrote:
> > > Sorry for not replying to that earlier. I'm not quite sure it's
> > > actually worthwhile doing so - did you try to measure any memory / cpu
> > > savings?
> >
> > No problem, thanks for the reply! Unfortunately, I did not do anything
> > significant in terms of mem/cpu measurements. However, I have noticed
> > non-trivial differences between optimized and unoptimized .bc files
> > that were dumped from time to time.
>
> Could you expand on what you mean here? Are you saying that you got
> significantly better optimization results by doing function optimization
> early on? That'd be surprising imo?
>
> Greetings,
>
> Andres Freund
>