(original) (raw)

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 7:05 PM Tom Stellard <tstellar@redhat.com> wrote:

On 02/14/2020 09:13 AM, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev wrote:
\> What do you see as the pros and cons of making it a stable target? Does anyone else have any concerns about doing so?
\>

My only concern with AVR is having active mantainers. It doesn't seem
to have had much development in the last 6 months.

https://reviews.llvm.org/p/dylanmckay/ looks reasonably active to me. And it looks a lot more active than e.g. XCore :)

\-Tom

\> -Chris
\>
\>> On Feb 14, 2020, at 7:59 AM, Nico Weber via llvm-dev <llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
\>>
\>> +better dylanmckay address
\>>
\>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 10:58 AM Nico Weber <thakis@chromium.org thakis@chromium.org>> wrote:
\>>
\>> Hi,
\>>
\>> There was a thread a few days ago about the expectations for experimental targets. At the moment, the only experimental target is AVR. It's been in the tree for a long time now, and generally seems well-behaved.
\>>
\>> Should we just make it a normal target?
\>>
\>> Nico
\>>
\>> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\>> LLVM Developers mailing list
\>> llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org>
\>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
\>
\>
\>
\> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\> LLVM Developers mailing list
\> llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org
\> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
\>