[PATCH] D22173: Move LTO.cpp to a new LTOResolution library.
Teresa Johnson via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Fri Jul 8 17:27:48 PDT 2016
I don't remember if it was theoretical or if I tried this and ran into
issues. Thinking about it some more now - I suppose adding new dependence
from clang to llvm should never introduce a circular dependence? So I don't
know what I was concerned about...
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Mehdi AMINI <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:
> mehdi_amini added a comment.
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D22173#479018, @pcc wrote:
> > > If we're just dealing with legacy here, I'd just move all these into
> include/llvm/LTO/legacy/ instead.
> > I think that would work as well, but I wanted to make a clean break.
> > We'll also have LTOBackend.cpp which will be used by clang. I think
> Teresa mentioned some problems depending on the existing LTO library from
> Teresa, can you refresh us on this aspect?
Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson at google.com | 408-460-2413
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-commits