[LLVMdev] Calling-convention lowering proposal

Andrew Haley aph at redhat.com
Fri May 1 13:15:55 PDT 2009


Evan Cheng wrote:
> On Apr 30, 2009, at 11:27 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> 
>> Chris Lattner wrote:
>>> 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.

>> Perhaps, but it's a barrier for those who actually want to use  
>> LLVM's JIT.

>> We'd love to keep up with the latest versions of LLVM, but stuff just keeps
>> breaking and sometimes features are just deleted.  For example, it used
>> to be possible easily to turn on and off asm dumping, but it isn't  
>> any more.
> 
> That's not true. It's just the option name was changed.

You can turn it on once, but you can never turn it off again.
That is, unless there is some way to do it other than by passing
command line options to cl::ParseCommandLineOptions.  The last
time I looked the problem was that DebugOnly was defined as
cl::ValueRequired rather than cl::OneOrMore, so the CLI would
reject any subsequent setting.

If there is some way around this, I'd be delighted to know.

Andrew.




More information about the llvm-dev mailing list