[LLVMdev] Moving towards a singular pointer type

Chandler Carruth chandlerc at google.com
Mon Feb 9 11:48:40 PST 2015


On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Pete Cooper <peter_cooper at apple.com> wrote:

> Also:
>
> It also wouldn't be too hard to accept the old .ll syntax, since the
>> upgrade path mostly discards information.
>>
>
> I agree here. If only because of th eregression test suite, and the
> *incredible* tediousness of updating the pointers. The auto-upgrade for
> this kind of thing is essentially perfect.
>
> I agree in principle, but I think the precedent here is dangerous.


Yea, this is very close to the line. I'm mildly in favor of it, mostly
because of the truly pervasive nature of the change and the trivial nature
of support.... But it wouldn't be hard to argue me out of it honestly....
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150209/220a4bea/attachment.html>


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list