Greetings all, I've been working more on the gcc side with multi-threading it and researching that. However in my time there it seems that both projects can really take advantage of certain C++11 features, most notably std::move, r values, auto and perhaps stronger pointer/floating types. It seems that clang/LLVM are in the same boat and it would help mostly with IR passes or backends and I would like some thoughts if people want to do this, Nick
Am Sa., 16. Nov. 2019 um 10:50 Uhr schrieb Nicholas Krause via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>:> I've been working more on the gcc side with multi-threading it and > researching that. However in > > my time there it seems that both projects can really take advantage of > certain C++11 features, > > most notably std::move, r values, auto and perhaps stronger > pointer/floating types. > > It seems that clang/LLVM are in the same boat and it would help mostly > with IR passes or > > backends and I would like some thoughts if people want to do this,Could you be more concrete? The LLVM code base already makes plenty use of move/r-value semantics and auto. What does it have to do with multithreading? Michael
On 11/18/19 1:16 PM, Michael Kruse wrote:> Am Sa., 16. Nov. 2019 um 10:50 Uhr schrieb Nicholas Krause via > llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>: >> I've been working more on the gcc side with multi-threading it and >> researching that. However in >> >> my time there it seems that both projects can really take advantage of >> certain C++11 features, >> >> most notably std::move, r values, auto and perhaps stronger >> pointer/floating types. >> >> It seems that clang/LLVM are in the same boat and it would help mostly >> with IR passes or >> >> backends and I would like some thoughts if people want to do this, > Could you be more concrete? The LLVM code base already makes plenty > use of move/r-value semantics and auto. What does it have to do with > multithreading? > > MichaelThat's my other work don't worry about it. Sorry for the confusion about that. Nick