Anastasia added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: jdoerfert. In D57768#1389012 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D57768#1389012>, @rjmccall wrote:
> In D57768#1386862 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D57768#1386862>, @Anastasia wrote: > > > - SYCL seem to require adding tight dependencies from the standard > > libraries into the compiler because many language features are hidden > > behind library classes. This is not common for Clang. We had a discussion > > about this issue during the implementation of OpenCL C++ and it was decided > > not to go this route for upstream Clang. Can you explain your current > > approach to implement this? I think @rjmccall or @rsmith might need to be > > involved in this. > > > I'd like to know more about this, but I'll point out that this isn't > unprecedented: > > - C compilers have hard-coded knowledge about `va_list`. > - C++ compilers have hard-coded knowledge about `std::type_info` and > `std::initializer_list` (and possibly others I've forgotten). > > Whether that's the right direction for SYCL, though, I can't say until I > understand more about what dependencies are being proposed. In OpenCL we hard-coded `printf` btw! I think it would be good to understand how much of those is needed for SYCL. The fact that the entire language is implemented as a library is a bit worrying. But hopefully we can already map most of the things to some existing language constructs (address space qualifiers, function attributes, etc...). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D57768/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D57768 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
