[LLVMdev] RFC: Are we ready to completely move away from the optionality of a DataLayout? (original) (raw)
Chandler Carruth chandlerc at gmail.com
Sun Oct 19 17:16:34 PDT 2014
- Previous message: [LLVMdev] RFC: Are we ready to completely move away from the optionality of a DataLayout?
- Next message: [LLVMdev] RFC: Are we ready to completely move away from the optionality of a DataLayout?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Robinson, Paul < Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com> wrote:
> Just as a heads up, I'm hearing widespread support
After 12 hours on a Sunday? You people need Real Lives. :-)
Hah. Probably true, but honestly the only reason I'm not waiting a lot longer is because this is extremely low risk and low controversy I suspect. The writing has been on the wall here for years.
--paulr
P.S. This won't make multiarch stuff (arm/thumb, or the stuff Eric will be talking about at the dev meeting) more painful, right? If it's already module-level that seems unlikely but I felt like I should ask.
Not at all, if anything it will make it easier by removing variables. I agree messing with any of that stuff would be cause for concern. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20141019/4a600652/attachment.html>
- Previous message: [LLVMdev] RFC: Are we ready to completely move away from the optionality of a DataLayout?
- Next message: [LLVMdev] RFC: Are we ready to completely move away from the optionality of a DataLayout?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]