Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "c76d435d".
2010 Sep 07
0
[LLVMdev] Union type, is it really used or necessary?
On 7 September 2010 15:36, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote:
> Otherwise the feature being unused will quickly became broken.
It was already broken for ages... :/
Even if you're not using the backends (or MC), having it in front-end
only will only confuse new users that will try to use it and hope it
just works (my case, a few months ago).
If there is nothing,
2010 Sep 07
2
[LLVMdev] Union type, is it really used or necessary?
Hello, Erik
> Otherwise, I'd like to know what needs to be done to get unions
> back in LLVM.
Well, the answer is pretty easy: someone should "fix" them to be
supported throughout the whole set of libraries and became a
"maintainer".
Otherwise the feature being unused will quickly became broken.
--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and
2010 Sep 07
4
[LLVMdev] Union type, is it really used or necessary?
...pers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
--
-- Talin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100907/c76d435d/attachment.html>