[cfe-dev] [RFC] C++17 hardware constructive / destructive interference size

[Hal Finkel via cfe-dev]

On 05/25/2018 01:29 PM, JF Bastien via cfe-dev wrote:
>
>  9. Leave other targets as-is for now, since I can’t test them and I
>     don’t know what the appropriate values would be. Hopefully this
>     RFC will elicit feedback as to what the appropriate values are.
>
>
>
> What do y’all think?

What does "as is" mean? I think that we should not define values at all
until someone with knowledge of the target sets values. These become
part of the target ABI, and I don't think that we want to accidentally
make an ABI choice for a target.

 -Hal

-- 
Hal Finkel
Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20180525/702ec39d/attachment.html>