[llvm-dev] Third-party libraries policy

[Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev]

> On Oct 18, 2016, at 8:41 PM, Bekket McClane <bekket.mcclane at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> 於 2016年10月19日 上午11:30 寫道：
>> 
>> 
>>> On Oct 18, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Bekket McClane via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> The LLVM variant we're building now contains usage of a third-party threading library, and we would like to push our work upstream in the future.
>> 
>> What is the motivation?
>> For instance what is this doing that std::thread or llvm::ThreadPool is not providing? Why is it useful to have it in tree?
> 
> The library we’re using is actually a routine library which provides extremely fast context switching similar to Go routine.

That’s interesting, but are you intending to use this as a runtime to go with the code *generated by LLVM* or are you planning to use this to implement the compiler internals?

This is a significant difference, as in the first case we have started a “parallel libs” subproject here: http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/parallel-libs/trunk/ <http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/parallel-libs/trunk/>
I’m not sure we would take an external lib, but we would consider integrating as a new LLVM subproject if there was a motivation on both side to get there.

For the second case (using it in the compiler itself), what kind of uses do you have for this in your “LLVM variant”?

> I think neither standard library nor LLVM support library provide this functionality.

We’re implementing C++ coroutine though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C8NnE1Dg4A <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C8NnE1Dg4A>
(Not sure how it relates to what you’re doing, but since you mentioned coroutines…)

— 
Mehdi



> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Are third-party libraries welcomed to be added in LLVM? If yes, what folder structure should we arrange? 
>> 
>> In general we avoid them as much as possible and need a really compelling justification to include one.
>> Chris reinstated this position recently: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-September/105166.html <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-September/105166.html>
> Thanks, we would take this policy into our consideration.
> 
> B.R.
> McClane
>> 
>> — 
>> Mehdi
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20161018/bc006346/attachment.html>