[llvm-dev] Should we split llvm Support and ADT?

[Zachary Turner via llvm-dev]

Fair enough, i sort of regret mentioning that specific method of splitting
originally.

For the record, i think any splitting should make sense on its own merit
without considering tablegen, and hopefully the end result of "tablegen
eventually depends on less stuff" would happen naturally
On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 10:37 AM Chris Lattner <clattner at nondot.org> wrote:

>
> > On May 26, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > Changing a header file somewhere and having to spend 10 minutes waiting
> for a build leads to a lot of wasted developer time.
> >
> > The real culprit here is tablegen.  Can we split support and ADT into
> two - the parts that tablegen depends on and the parts that it doesn’t?
>
> In all the comments downthread, I think there is one thing that hasn't
> been mentioned: doing a split like this makes tblgen evolution more
> difficult.  If libsupport was split into “used by tblgen” and “not used by
> tblgen” sections, and then a new tblgen feature needs to use other parts of
> libsupport, they’d have to be moved into the “used by tblgen” directory.
>
> Splitting libsupport as a whole out into its own llvm subproject has come
> up many times though, and does make a lot of sense.
>
> -Chris
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170604/0f8333e7/attachment.html>