[llvm-dev] RFC: Constant folding math functions for long double

[James Molloy via llvm-dev]

Hi Neil,

I admit that at this point I haven't considered the implications of the
license MPFR is under, and at the moment I'm sticking my head in the sand
until and unless we want to go down this path.

My expectation is that we would use their exposed API - so we'd #include
<mpfr.h> and use functions from there, linking against -lmpfr and -lgmp. I
admit that this option would indeed add another dimension to the testing
matrix.

Do you have an alternative solution or a preferred solution of those I
enumerated earlier?

Cheers,

James

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 at 15:24 Neil Henning <llvm at duskborn.com> wrote:

> Hey James,
>
> I really fundamentally dislike libMPFR.
>
> License of the codebase aside, would a dependency be on the built .so, or
> would it be that we'd want to pull in the code and build that?
>
> My worry if we do bring it in even as a soft dependency is how is this
> figured out - is it a case that CMake will, if it finds the .so on the
> system, use and link against it? I worry that we are introducing another
> matrix of potential failures if the lib is present or not.
>
> Cheers,
> -Neil.
>
>
> On 04/04/16 15:19, James Molloy wrote:
>
> Hi Neil,
>
> > Please not (1).
>
> Could you please elaborate on your concern a bit more?
>
> Cheers,
>
> James
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160404/daf2a939/attachment.html>