<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><br></div><div><div>On Dec 11, 2012, at 7:43 , Rafael Espíndola <<a href="mailto:rafael.espindola@gmail.com">rafael.espindola@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">We can always add it back that day, no?<br></blockquote><br><br>Sure, but if there's no real need to remove it why not leave it alone?<br>It seems a rather pointless clean up to me. That said, I won't object if<br>Saleem goes ahead and removes it.<br></blockquote><br>Short of some ABI stability (like in the C api) or generalization of<br>users (for example, we want a macro to call isPowerOfTwo or other<br>functions that do need TargetData), I think we should make the code as<br>simple as possible.<br><br>Having the target data makes the function a bit more cumbersome to<br>call, and a bit more cumbersome to read. Not having it also makes it<br>clear just by looking at the interface that in doesn't do anything<br>target dependent.<br></blockquote></div><br><div>I think that's Chandler's point—the interface shouldn't imply that it's a target-independent predicate, even though the current implementation is<i>.</i> What about renaming to isKnownPowerOfTwo, to make it clear that the target could affect the answer?</div></body></html>