fix:GenLL flag to correct compile#1314
Conversation
🔍 PR Review AnalysisReviewing PR #1314 - Changes to internal/build/build.go Todo Checklist:
📋 SummaryThis PR adds 20 lines of code to the 🔍 Detailed AnalysisCode Quality Assessment✅ Strengths:
Potential Issues
Architecture & Design✅ Good Design Decisions:
Best Practices Compliance✅ Follows Go Best Practices:
Testing & Documentation❓ Considerations:
🚀 Suggestions for ImprovementWhile the code is functional and well-written, here are some optimization opportunities:
✅ Overall AssessmentThis is a well-implemented feature addition that:
The code is ready for merge with only minor optimization opportunities for future consideration. 👉 Want me to re-run this review? Just type |
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @luoliwoshang, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request enhances the build system to correctly handle LLVM Intermediate Representation files. It introduces a new build configuration flag, GenLL, which, when activated, enables the compilation of .ll files into standard object files using clang prior to the linking phase. This change ensures that projects utilizing LLVM IR can be successfully built and linked, resolving potential compilation failures related to these file types.
Highlights
- LLVM IR Compilation: Introduced new logic to compile
.ll(LLVM Intermediate Representation) files into standard.oobject files usingclangwhen theGenLLbuild flag is enabled. - Build Process Integration: Modified the
linkObjFilesfunction to preprocess LLVM IR files, ensuring they are properly compiled before being passed to the linker, thus correcting compilation issues.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a fix to correctly handle the GenLL flag by compiling .ll files into object files before linking. The implementation is sound, but I've suggested a refactoring to improve efficiency and code clarity. By modifying the slice of object files in-place, we can avoid allocating a new slice, which makes the code more concise and performant.
| var compiledObjFiles []string | ||
| for _, objFile := range objFiles { | ||
| if strings.HasSuffix(objFile, ".ll") { | ||
| oFile := strings.TrimSuffix(objFile, ".ll") + ".o" | ||
| args := []string{"-o", oFile, "-c", objFile, "-Wno-override-module"} | ||
| if verbose { | ||
| fmt.Fprintln(os.Stderr, "clang", args) | ||
| } | ||
| if err := ctx.compiler().Compile(args...); err != nil { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("failed to compile %s: %v", objFile, err) | ||
| } | ||
| compiledObjFiles = append(compiledObjFiles, oFile) | ||
| } else { | ||
| compiledObjFiles = append(compiledObjFiles, objFile) | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| objFiles = compiledObjFiles |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This loop can be simplified by modifying the objFiles slice in-place. This avoids allocating a new slice compiledObjFiles, which improves both performance and readability.
for i, objFile := range objFiles {
if strings.HasSuffix(objFile, ".ll") {
oFile := strings.TrimSuffix(objFile, ".ll") + ".o"
args := []string{"-o", oFile, "-c", objFile, "-Wno-override-module"}
if verbose {
fmt.Fprintln(os.Stderr, "clang", args)
}
if err := ctx.compiler().Compile(args...); err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("failed to compile %s: %v", objFile, err)
}
objFiles[i] = oFile
}
}
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1314 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 90.10% 90.10%
=======================================
Files 43 43
Lines 12562 12562
=======================================
Hits 11319 11319
Misses 1087 1087
Partials 156 156 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
3 participants
fix