[llvm-dev] Target Acceptance Policy

[Renato Golin via llvm-dev]

On 4 Aug 2016 8:04 p.m., "Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev" <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 01:12:40PM -0500, Krzysztof Parzyszek via
llvm-dev wrote:
> > On 8/4/2016 12:44 PM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev wrote:
> > > I still think that's something for the code review.
> >
> > Would the answer ever change?  Would the reviewers ever say "you should
> > implement MC" for one target, and "not doing MC is fine" for another?
>
> It can be formulated in a neutral way as "A new target should use all
> applicatable LLVM infrastructure" or so. Not using MC makes sense for a
> target that is by nature textual. Not using any of the ISel variants but
> rolling custom code on the other hand would be considered a big question
> mark.

I still think this is so vague that it's better left for the code review...

I mean, we're not encoding something new, just the very limit of
acceptability. This seems to be well within the realm of standard code
review...

Cheers,
Renato
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160804/b3aad4de/attachment.html>