[polly] Little refactoring

Johannes Doerfert jdoerfert at codeaurora.org
Fri Jun 13 11:11:22 PDT 2014

Commited with explicit types in r210926 and r210927


Johannes Doerfert
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by
The Linux Foundation

-----Original Message-----
From: llvm-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu
[mailto:llvm-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Tobias Grosser
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 9:40 AM
To: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [polly] Little refactoring

On 13/06/2014 18:08, Johannes Doerfert wrote:
>>> On 06/13/2014 01:27 AM, Johannes Doerfert wrote:
>>>> Refactoring:
>>>> -          Refactored reoccurring if cascade
>>> LGTM.
> One more to commit.
>>>> -          C++11 iterators & range loops.
>>> I'm not sure what others think, but I don't like range loops that 
>>> use
> auto for the element type. It is a MemoryAccess, why not call it that 
> way ;-).
> I can do both [As long as I can use range loops ;)]. Is there a llvm 
> guideline? If not let's define one for us.

I would use the explicit type, except if this type is obviously redundant or
overly complex.

>>> Apart from that, LGTM.
> Once the above is cleared, one more to commit.

Feel free to commit. (Just reply with the commit id, such that it becomes
clear this thread is closed)

llvm-commits mailing list
llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu

More information about the llvm-commits mailing list