llvm dev - Jul 2013 - [LLVMdev] Cutting down the number of platform checks

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote:
> Yes. What you are seeing are the platform checks, where the build system
> looks for the presence of functions, headers, etc and then generates a
> configuration file with that information.

I've been meaning to cut down on the number of these because they are super
slow and wasteful.  Some of them are dead and can be removed without
discussion.

Some of them are used inconsistently, like HAVE_STRING_H.  Do we really
support any platform that lacks a <string.h>?  All of Errno.cpp is in an
ifdef for this macro, but I suspect we include string.h elsewhere
unconditionally.
http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/Support/Errno.cpp?revision=167191&view=markup

Is everyone OK with eliminating checks for headers and symbols that we use
unconditionally anyway?  (assert.h, mempcy, etc)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130723/d555269c/attachment.html>

Sure. Preapproved if you feel the need for autoconf. Let me know if
you need/want help regenerating.

-eric

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es>
wrote:
>>
>> Yes. What you are seeing are the platform checks, where the build
system
>> looks for the presence of functions, headers, etc and then generates a
>> configuration file with that information.
>
>
> I've been meaning to cut down on the number of these because they are
super
> slow and wasteful.  Some of them are dead and can be removed without
> discussion.
>
> Some of them are used inconsistently, like HAVE_STRING_H.  Do we really
> support any platform that lacks a <string.h>?  All of Errno.cpp is in
an
> ifdef for this macro, but I suspect we include string.h elsewhere
> unconditionally.
>
http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/Support/Errno.cpp?revision=167191&view=markup
>
> Is everyone OK with eliminating checks for headers and symbols that we use
> unconditionally anyway?  (assert.h, mempcy, etc)
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>