r216662 - [ARM] Change default ABI for AArch32 to be "aapcs" (was "apcs-gnu")

[Eric Christopher]

:) Thanks for looking into it.

-eric

On Wed Dec 10 2014 at 2:24:25 PM James Molloy <james at jamesmolloy.co.uk>
wrote:

> Yeah, rereading the above a third time I've had a change of heart and
> agree with you. Revert away :)
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 at 22:23, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed Dec 10 2014 at 2:21:23 PM James Molloy <james at jamesmolloy.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Oliver is away on vacation at the moment - no idea when he will see
>>> this.
>>>
>>> I don't personally agree with reverting the change for the reason you
>>> gave. Apcs-gnu has gone the way of the dodo apart from on Darwin - it
>>> doesn't make sense to default to something that is not used.
>>>
>>> Granted, a full triple should be used. However, in principle I'm not
>>> sure that implementation details such as backend defaults and test cases
>>> should influence the end user behaviour in the only user facing tool.
>>>
>>> As I say, I'm not against the change but it would be nice if there was a
>>> more compelling reason.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>>
>> I agree with the idea of changing the default. It should have been done
>> in both places and if Oliver wants to do so I'm not going to argue against
>> it.
>>
>> -eric
>>
>>
>>> James
>>> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 at 20:37, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10 December 2014 at 19:46, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Since it doesn't seem like there's a reason other than "it seemed
>>>> like a
>>>> > nice idea" (which I agree with, just that it's more work than just
>>>> the front
>>>> > end change) I'm going to revert this for now and make sure the ABI
>>>> > definitions are unified between the front and back end. If we decide
>>>> we
>>>> > really want to change it then it can be done in both the front end
>>>> and back
>>>> > end with the requisite testsuite updates.
>>>>
>>>> That's a good point. The code as it is doesn't seem like it was well
>>>> thought, but hacked in by different people at different times and
>>>> "approved" by people that didn't care much what the default is (like
>>>> myself).
>>>>
>>>> Reverting is probably the safest thing to do, right now. If that
>>>> creates problems for Oliver, than we should get more concrete reasons
>>>> and plans than just a "nice idea".
>>>>
>>>> cheers,
>>>> --renato
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> cfe-commits mailing list
>>>> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20141210/f40e93f1/attachment.html>