Open
Description
When I first implemented
matchArg
, I heavily drew inspiration fromSAWCentral.Crucible.LLVM.Overrides.matchArg
, which also matches onexpectedTy
(but whereexpectedTy
is an LLVMMemType
instead). Looking back on the MIR version ofmatchArg
with fresh eyes, however, you are right: there really isn't much of a point in includingexpectedTy
, since we could just as well use theTy
stored inside of theTypeShape
. It might be nice to simplify the implementation of this function by removingexpectedTy
.
(To be honest, I also wonder if the LLVM
matchArg
really needs to match onexpectedTy
either, but that is a task best left for later.)
Originally posted by @RyanGlScott in #2427 (comment)