Eric, Did you get a chance to take a look at cleaned up getTargetToolChain() and ?
--Artem On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Artem Belevich <[email protected]> wrote: > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D9509#167188, @echristo wrote: > > > Not really happy with the getTargetToolChain changes. Can you go ahead > and revisit the necessity of those (and probably the naming of the > StringRef argument as well)? > > > getToolChain does two things -- calculates a triple based on default > triple, command line args and optional DarwinArch and then selects a > toolchain based on the triple. I needed toolchain selection by triple, so > I've extracted it into getTargetToolChain. > > Alternative approach would be to extend computeTargetTriple so that it can > figure out that I need to get a NVPTX triple based on DarwinArchName > (renamed to ArchName?). IMO it's not as clean as using > getTargetToolchain(Triple) considering that we already know the triple. > > I've changed the code so it no longer uses computeTargetTriple() directly > (and removed forward declaration), but kept getTargetToolchain(). > > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D9509 > > EMAIL PREFERENCES > http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ > > > -- --Artem Belevich
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
