llvm dev - Sep 2008 - [LLVMdev] Specifying Additional Compilation Passes to lli

Hi,
Is this the right mailing list for sending in diffs by irregular contributers?
Should I send diffs directly to the code owner instead?
Tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas B. Jablin" <tjablin at CS.Princeton.EDU>
To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 1:55:09 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Specifying Additional Compilation Passes to lli

Hi,
Here is the diff for the pod file that goes with my earlier change.
Tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas B. Jablin" <tjablin at CS.Princeton.EDU>
To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 1:30:24 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [LLVMdev] Specifying Additional Compilation Passes to lli

Hi,

I'm interested in specifying some additional passes to the JIT via the
command-line. The enclosed patch allows lli to take compiler passes as
command-line arguments in the same way opt does. This is my first submission, so
any comments, criticisms, or observations would be very welcome. Thanks.

Tom Jablin
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Thomas B. Jablin
<tjablin at cs.princeton.edu> wrote:
> Hi,
> Is this the right mailing list for sending in diffs by irregular
contributers? Should I send diffs directly to the code owner instead?
> Tom
Here is fine; llvm-commits is also fine.

It might take a little while for a non-trivial patch to get review.

-Eli