[PATCH] Refactor duplicate functions

[Bernie Ogden]

Re-ping...

I think the patch is good, if not pretty, so I'd like to commit. Can anyone
comment on whether the tests are enough to guarantee preservation of the
existing Darwin behaviour?

Thanks,

Bernie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernie Ogden [mailto:bogden at arm.com]
> Sent: 04 December 2013 10:36
> To: Renato Golin; Jim Grosbach
> Cc: reviews+D2243+public+6ca39a6218cf2957 at llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com;
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; Amara Emerson; Eric Christopher
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] Refactor duplicate functions
> 
> Ping
> 
> Am I OK to go ahead with this patch? As Renato says 'Mainly that boils
> down to: are the added Darwin tests enough to guarantee compatibility?'
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bernie
> 
> 
> From: Renato Golin [mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org]
> Sent: 23 November 2013 12:34
> To: Jim Grosbach
> Cc: Bernard Ogden; reviews+D2243+public+6ca39a6218cf2957 at llvm-
> reviews.chandlerc.com; cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; Amara Emerson; Eric
> Christopher
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refactor duplicate functions
> 
> On 22 November 2013 23:35, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote:
> Yeah. It's a long road, and also raises the typical questions of just
> how much GCC command line compatibility is worth, etc..
> 
> Indeed, but we digressed. ;)
> 
> Is the current patch conforming to Darwin usage of arch/march/mcpu?
> Mainly that boils down to: are the added Darwin tests enough to
> guarantee compatibility?
> 
> cheers,
> --renato