[cfe-dev] A proposal for adding OpenCL C++ support (Spec v2.2)

[John McCall via cfe-dev]

> On Mar 23, 2018, at 2:30 PM, Anastasia Stulova via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> There were no objections to this so far. I assume it means nobody is opposing this new feature.

I have no objections.

> Just to give a bit more info and a chance for the last feedback. We don't plan to contribute the whole patch but only around 3K lines + tests. The overall changes will be smaller than OpenCL 2.0. And they will mainly affect C++ code paths in Sema and CodeGen, but some parsing bits too.
> 
> The time frame to start this work will hopefully be the beginning of April.

Okay.  Can you explain what it means that you won't be contributing the whole patch?

John.

> 
> Cheers,
> Anastasia
> 
> From: cfe-dev <cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of Anastasia Stulova via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> Sent: 23 February 2018 16:29
> To: clang-dev developer list
> Cc: nd
> Subject: [cfe-dev] A proposal for adding OpenCL C++ support (Spec v2.2)
>  
> Hello,
> 
> A number of developers from the member companies within the Khronos Group are interested to contribute the prototype implementation of OpenCL C++ that is currently located on github and based on version 3.6:
> https://github.com/KhronosGroup/SPIR/commit/0cfb6f7533d42ae3398a8574efd8abbdac88ac44 <https://github.com/KhronosGroup/SPIR/commit/0cfb6f7533d42ae3398a8574efd8abbdac88ac44>
> 
> This implementation is compliant to OpenCL v2.2 standard:
> https://www.khronos.org/registry/OpenCL/specs/opencl-2.2-cplusplus.pdf <https://www.khronos.org/registry/OpenCL/specs/opencl-2.2-cplusplus.pdf>
> Similarly to OpenCL C being based on C99, OpenCL C++ support is entirely based on C++14 with a number of extensions (some of which will be shared with OpenCL C) and a few minor restrictions.
> 
> The plan would be to take small patches from the github repository and perform any necessary rework and clean up before putting up for review. From the OpenCL side, I don't see any issue with this plan as it doesn't interfere with any current development I am aware of, and also it would be great to progress to the next OpenCL standard. I just want to check if there are any objections from anyone or things we should be aware of before the start. I'm particularly looking for feedback from C++ implementers as there might be some overlap.
> 
> Additionally, there are two more related threads, which I plan to discuss separately. There is:
> (i) standard library support libclcxx: https://github.com/KhronosGroup/libclcxx. <https://github.com/KhronosGroup/libclcxx.>
> (ii) and IR generation to SPIRV: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-February/121317.html <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-February/121317.html>
> that we would like to provide as well, in order to allow Clang to produce an end binary targeting a wider range of architectures directly (not just AMD GPU). We expect that the complete open source solution for OpenCL C++ will increase significantly Clang users and unify our development forces i.e. refactoring, bug hunting, etc. The plan would be to do similar for OpenCL C too at a later point of time. 
> 
> Please, contact me if you have any thoughts or comments.
> 
> Cheers,
> Anastasia
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20180328/1ecab8cb/attachment.html>