search for: 707bddc4

Sent from my iPad On Jan 14, 2013, at 1:09 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: > This has been an idea floating around in my head for a while and after several discussions with others it continues to hold up so I thought I would mail it out. Sorry for cross posting to both lists, but this is an issue that would significantly impact both LLVM and Clang. > >

...as my intent! Is there something about my proposed wording that makes you think it differs from the status quo, or would lead to differences? -Chandler -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130114/707bddc4/attachment.html>

This has been an idea floating around in my head for a while and after several discussions with others it continues to hold up so I thought I would mail it out. Sorry for cross posting to both lists, but this is an issue that would significantly impact both LLVM and Clang. Essentially, LLVM provides canned optimization "levels" for frontends to re-use. This is nothing new. However, we