[llvm-dev] Should we split llvm Support and ADT?
Pete Cooper via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Jun 1 14:21:20 PDT 2017
> On Jun 1, 2017, at 2:18 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:15 PM Pete Cooper via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> On May 31, 2017, at 9:09 PM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com <mailto:aprantl at apple.com>> wrote:
>>> Dwarf should be in libDebugInfoDWARF.
>> I think the reason why it isn't there is because lib/DebugInfo is for *consuming* debug info, but these definitions are useful for both reading and writing DWARF. That is not to say that they couldn't be moved somewhere else of course (but probably not lib/DebugInfo in its current form).
> Ah, didn’t know that. I’m sure a bunch of the others I mentioned also have similar reasons for being where they are.
> Ultimately its a judgement call, but i’d say that libDebugInfoDWARF is a less bad place for this file than libSupport. Not a great reason to move it, but if someone wants to I still wouldn’t personally object.
> That would seem to have a concrete disadvantage, though - that'd make many things dependent on libDebugInfo that aren't currently - so there'd be real changes in build time, etc building all the DWARF parsing/dumping/etc API code for users who only generate DWARF but don't parse it.
Thats a fair point. And ultimately something we could check for before moving it (see who is using Dwarf.o but not libDebugInfoDwarf).
The other place for this particular case (and i'm not really trying that hard to move this one file, just discussing merits), would be libCodeGen or even libMC. For better or worse, everyone who emits dwarf today does it with the MC layer, even dsymutil unfortunately.
> If it were moved, it'd probably want to be a separate library that both DWARF reading libraries and DWARF writing libraries could be dependent on. (unless the reading/writing could be tightened up to the point where it was mostly a common library used for both sides)
>> -- adrian
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev