JonChesterfield added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/Driver.cpp:755
+                      *this, TT, *HostTC, C.getInputArgs(), 
Action::OFK_OpenMP);
+                else if (TT.isAMDGCN())
+                  DeviceTC =
----------------
pdhaliwal wrote:
> JonChesterfield wrote:
> > Minor suggestion,
> > ```
> > if (TT.isNVPTX() {
> >  ...
> > } else {
> >   assert(TT.isAMDGCN());
> >   ...
> > }```
> > 
> > ? Semantically equivalent, but `if () else if ()` looks like there is a 
> > missing else clause.
> I think, having assert in last else is bit cleaner.  What do you think?
I also prefer the if () else {assert()} construct.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D94961/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D94961

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to