[PATCH] LLD: Implement our own future and use that for FileArchive::preload().

Rui Ueyama ruiu at google.com
Mon Mar 2 20:17:42 PST 2015

The reason why I didn't implement complete future and promise as specified in C++11 is because the amount of effort that would require. I implemented a future just in 30 lines here. On the other hand a complete implementation probably require 200+ lines. This is the only place we use future, so I thought that it just doesn't pay.

If we are going to use future in many places in LLVM projects, it worth implementing a "real" one. But I imagine it's unlikely -- the linker is probably exceptional in the sense that it gains a lot from multi-threading. If we are going to see more uses of future in LLVM, maybe we should think about that.



More information about the llvm-commits mailing list