[LLVMdev] RFC: Are we ready to completely move away from the optionality of a DataLayout?
jfb at google.com
Mon Oct 20 09:21:11 PDT 2014
> > I'm biased towards making DataLayout mandatory but it does break
> legitimate use cases. Target-independent bitcode is not in the best shape
> but this change would kill it off entirely, so we better make sure the
> maintenance is causing enough pain to rectify the change.
> Target-independent bitcode exists in the form of things like SPIR and
> PNaCl. These all have a DataLayout. The IR already implicitly depends on
> some of these things (e.g. pointer size), making it explicit doesn't break
+1 on Chandler's proposal from PNaCl's perspective.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev