[LLVMdev] TableGen docs

[Renato Golin]

On 18 March 2014 12:54, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote:
> Would it also make sense to include the clang usages of tablegen
> somewhere in #1, and then perhaps have #2.5 about clang usages (not
> volunteering you for that work btw)? Diagnostics and attributes make
> heavy use of tablegen in clang, for instance.

I meant to ask about this... Clang has a huge list of back-ends and
they seem extremely similar to each other. Is there any reason why
this is necessary, is this some deficiency in how the TableGen engine
runs, or was it just the simplest way to add functionality?

I agree it'd be good to have both LLVM and Clang usages.

cheers,
--renato