[llvm-dev] Flang landing in the monorepo - next Monday!

[Richard Barton via llvm-dev]

+cc list

From: Eric Schweitz (PGI) <eric.schweitz at pgroup.com>
Sent: 10 January, 2020 16:08
To: Richard Barton <Richard.Barton at arm.com>; Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com>; Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org>
Cc: Mike Edwards <medwards at llvm.org>
Subject: RE: [llvm-dev] Flang landing in the monorepo - next Monday!

Hi Richard,

Re: 7.

I posted a couple revisions to Phabricator to synch up the monorepo side of this equation. https://reviews.llvm.org/D72416 and https://reviews.llvm.org/D72418

The f18 project bits to make it work like an LLVM CMake project are rolled up with the PR to merge the middle part of the compiler. https://github.com/flang-compiler/f18/pull/920

--
Eric

From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>> On Behalf Of Richard Barton via llvm-dev
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2020 6:44 AM
To: Richard Barton <Richard.Barton at arm.com<mailto:Richard.Barton at arm.com>>; Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com<mailto:rengolin at gmail.com>>; Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org<mailto:hans at chromium.org>>; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Cc: Mike Edwards <medwards at llvm.org<mailto:medwards at llvm.org>>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Flang landing in the monorepo - next Monday!

Hi all

Apologies, I somehow combined two points in my list while copying from my editor to my email client! Below is the list as I intended, with changes in bold.

Ta
Rich

I think all these have been addressed (please correct me if you think otherwise)
1. Audit trail/visibility of code review [Addressed by Peter - code has been reviewed [a] to F18 coding guidelines [b].
2. Long-term viability of Flang community and overlap with existing LLVM community [Hopefully Hal and Johannes replies and Greg's and Pat's and my reply demonstrate long-term commitment to Flang after upstreaming]
3. Compatibility of license [Addressed by Steve, a recent update has made the licenses compatible [c]]
4. No use of LLVM APIs and so no connection to the project [Addressed by Hal and me - it is the natural next step in development as Flang starts to generate MLIR. Nvidia are working on this now.]

I think these are acknowledged right now and we are actively working on fixes:
5. No use of lit in the regression tests [Arm is working on this]
6. Need to refactor parts of clang driver that can be shared with flang into a separate library [Arm is working on this, but plans to implement a simple driver first before refactoring to better understand the opportunities to do so. See Peter's RFC [d] ]
7. No integration into the LLVM build system/Cmake [I think Pat and Eric have patches ready to go for this?]

I think these are only acknowledged, with the intention to remediate post merge, but no concrete plan or owner at this point:
8. No use of LLVM utilities or standard data structures
9. Simple deviations from the LLVM coding style
     a. Separating public headers into include/flang
     b. Syntactical things like braces on single line statements, comments on end of namespaces, etc.
     c. .cc file extensions rather than .cpp
10. Bigger deviations from the LLVM coding style that are harder to fix
    a. Early exits and not using else after return, etc.
11. Flang not supporting all the same C++ compilers as the rest of the project (even taking into account C++17 requirement)

________________________________
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200110/a118bf9b/attachment.html>