[PATCH] D25136: [Triple] Add Facebook vendor

[Daniel Berlin via llvm-commits]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com> wrote:

> smeenai added a subscriber: dberlin.
> smeenai added a comment.
>
> To address @dberlin's comments on the mailing list (I've lost the original
> mail so I can't reply directly):
>
> > So why not keep this patch local as well?
> >  In particular, if this is for local development, keeping this patch
> local
> >  also helps enforce this since any accidental use of the triple in public
> >  code will break quite obviously.
>
> The intent is to be able to upstream anything generic enough to be
> generally useful, even where the behavior is vendor-specific.
>
Can you give me a specific example of a thing you are thinking about that
you would add that is controlled by this?

This is different than what was talked about earlier, where you said:
"This would allow Facebook to play around with changes that they need for
local development, which may not necessarily be generic enough or generally
correct for merging into the mainline."

So i'm pretty confused :)

(Again, i'm actually really not opposed, i'm just not understanding the use
case.
Plenty  of people can tell you horror stories of triples that later made
life hard for people, so i'd like to avoid this being one of them :P)




>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D25136
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20161115/0c742179/attachment.html>