Hello. I'm KDE developer and while poking around LLVM, I've stumbled upon LLVM IR syntax definition for Kate. Is there any reason why hasn't this been upstreamed ( https://phabricator.kde.org/source/syntax-highlighting/repository/master/ )? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171226/7fc6db49/attachment.html>
Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev
2017-Dec-28 18:04 UTC
[llvm-dev] Upstreaming utils/kate/llvm.xml
I would guess because LLVM IR highlighting would be of interest only to LLVM developers, who would all have LLVM checked out anyway. Also the textual syntax isn't guaranteed stable long-term, and it would be an additional maintenance burden on LLVM developers to make KDE patches. I'm suspicious that even the version in the LLVM tree is not current, as it hasn't been updated in several years. --paulr From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Gleb Popov via llvm-dev Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 10:57 AM To: LLVM Dev Subject: [llvm-dev] Upstreaming utils/kate/llvm.xml Hello. I'm KDE developer and while poking around LLVM, I've stumbled upon LLVM IR syntax definition for Kate. Is there any reason why hasn't this been upstreamed ( https://phabricator.kde.org/source/syntax-highlighting/repository/master/ )? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171228/e89120c0/attachment.html>
Matt Arsenault via llvm-dev
2017-Dec-28 18:12 UTC
[llvm-dev] Upstreaming utils/kate/llvm.xml
> On Dec 28, 2017, at 13:04, Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I would guess because LLVM IR highlighting would be of interest only to LLVM developers, who would all have LLVM checked out anyway. Also the textual syntax isn't guaranteed stable long-term, and it would be an additional maintenance burden on LLVM developers to make KDE patches. I'm suspicious that even the version in the LLVM tree is not current, as it hasn't been updated in several years. > --paulr > <>We already have emacs and vim syntax highlighting in tree which people occasionally update. I don’t see why we wouldn’t include other editors there. The text format doesn’t change so radically that the syntax highlighting changes in any meaningful way.-Matt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171228/22e5937e/attachment.html>
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote:> I would guess because LLVM IR highlighting would be of interest only to > LLVM developers, who would all have LLVM checked out anyway. Also the > textual syntax isn't guaranteed stable long-term, and it would be an > additional maintenance burden on LLVM developers to make KDE patches. I'm > suspicious that even the version in the LLVM tree is not current, as it > hasn't been updated in several years. > > --paulr > > > > *From:* llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] *On Behalf Of *Gleb > Popov via llvm-dev > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 26, 2017 10:57 AM > *To:* LLVM Dev > *Subject:* [llvm-dev] Upstreaming utils/kate/llvm.xml > > > > Hello. I'm KDE developer and while poking around LLVM, I've stumbled upon > LLVM IR syntax definition for Kate. Is there any reason why hasn't this > been upstreamed ( https://phabricator.kde.org/source/syntax-highlighting/ > repository/master/ )? >Ok, is there any licensing issues that may prevent it be commited to Kate repository? If not, I'd do that myself. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171230/2ed78eff/attachment.html>