search for: enable_stag

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "enable_stag".

Did you mean: enable_st
2012 Jul 30
3
[LLVMdev] RFC: Staging area proposal for new backends
...urce drop of the release. The binaries produced for each release shouldn't include them though. > > Sounds good to me, I agree that more exposure is best. > > In terms of build system integration, I think it makes sense to do the following: > > Add a ENABLE_EXPERIMENTAL or ENABLE_STAGING flag that allows experimental features to be built (default: OFF) > Add an LLVM_STAGING_TARGETS list that contains all of the staging back-ends > Allow LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD to contain a back-end from LLVM_STAGING_TARGETS *only* if ENABLE_STAGING is ON > > This will allow the default...
2012 Jul 28
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: Staging area proposal for new backends
...eason to remove it from the source drop of the release. The binaries produced for each release shouldn't include them though. Sounds good to me, I agree that more exposure is best. In terms of build system integration, I think it makes sense to do the following: Add a ENABLE_EXPERIMENTAL or ENABLE_STAGING flag that allows experimental features to be built (default: OFF) Add an LLVM_STAGING_TARGETS list that contains all of the staging back-ends Allow LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD to contain a back-end from LLVM_STAGING_TARGETS *only* if ENABLE_STAGING is ON This will allow the default configuration to n...
2012 Jul 31
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: Staging area proposal for new backends
On 30 Jul 2012, at 19:18, Tom Stellard wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:54:21PM -0400, Justin Holewinski wrote: >> Add a ENABLE_EXPERIMENTAL or ENABLE_STAGING flag that allows experimental features to be built (default: OFF) >> Add an LLVM_STAGING_TARGETS list that contains all of the staging back-ends >> Allow LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD to contain a back-end from LLVM_STAGING_TARGETS *only* if ENABLE_STAGING is ON > > I've submitted...
2012 Jul 27
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Staging area proposal for new backends
On Jul 27, 2012, at 1:39 PM, Tom Stellard wrote: > >> We also need to come up with a plan regarding cutting releases. When >> 3.2 is branched, will all "staged" back-ends be removed? Or will >> they be left in the distribution so interested parties can build >> them? >> > > I can't really think of any disadvantages to keeping staged backends