<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/3/19 2:58 PM, llvm-dev wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Jeroen Dobbelaere via llvm-dev <llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org> writes:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Hi Jesper,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Thanks, these are interesting differences. The CHAR_BIT and byte
relation is established in the C standard and I would prefer the byte
terminology. It means the same thing as addressable unit but is a bit
shorter and probably more widely known.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Looking purely from a c/c++ language viewpoint, this makes sense. We
settled on using 'addressable unit size', but any abstraction will
already be helpful.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Given that f18 has just been accepted as an LLVM project, we probably
shouldn't be using C/C++ or any specific language terminology in LLVM.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Regardless of f18, we shouldn't anyway, unless it's terminology we independently define in our language reference. LLVM has supported many different language frontends for a long time :-)</p>
<p> -Hal<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
It seems useful to distinguish "addressable unit size" from "data size"
and talk about things using such abstract terminology.
-David
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>