[LLVMdev] Calling-convention lowering proposal

Chris Lattner clattner at apple.com
Thu Apr 30 10:24:03 PDT 2009

On Apr 30, 2009, at 9:38 AM, David Greene wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 April 2009 19:22, Chris Lattner wrote:
>> On Apr 29, 2009, at 8:39 AM, David Greene wrote:
>>> This patch changes the LLVM API.  We should have a process for
>>> deprecating
>>> obsolete interfaces before removing them entirely.  It's a  
>>> significant
>>> maintenance headache to pull down a new release and fix all of the  
>>> API
>>> issues along with tracking down new bugs introduced.
>> No, we make no attempt at being API compatible across revs of LLVM.
> That's a huge mistake going forward if we want to grow the community.

Perhaps.  However, I greatly prefer to make life easier for people who  
contribute code (by preventing them from having to worry about  
deprecation etc) than for those who don't.  Reducing the barrier to  
contributing code is a good way (IMO) to encourage contributions and  
new developers.

>> This is a great way to encourage people to contribute their code to
>> the project.  If they want to live with their code out of tree, then
>> they have to deal with API breakage.
> It's not about people not contributing code.  It's about 3rd party  
> modules
> that have to interface to LLVM.  The LLVM community does not care  
> about
> the Cray optimizer code.  But the Cray optimizer code must use LLVM  
> APIs
> to translate the Cray IR to LLVM IR.

Understood, Apple also has external code that interfaces to LLVM as  
well, and it has to be updated as well.  I still maintain that we  
should optimize for encouraging contributions.  If you have out of  
tree code that depends on unstable APIs, you should expect to have to  
change it to work with new version of LLVM.

The only stable API we vend is the C interface bindings.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list