jdoerfert added a comment. In D100514#2695271 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D100514#2695271>, @cchen wrote:
> In D100514#2693600 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D100514#2693600>, @jdoerfert > wrote: > >> Any reason we should not unconditionally use the OMPIRBuilder impl? (btw, >> many thanks for providing one!) >> We have an OMPIRBuilder always around in clang's codegen, so there is little >> reason not to use it if it is feature complete. > > I'm fine using OMPIRBuilder as default. I was not set it as default since > most of the clause/directive are still using Clang codegen as default (ex: > `master`, `critical`, and `for` are now use Clang codegen as default). Initially we did not have an OMPIRBuilder object unconditionally, now we have. Let's move over everything that is ready. So master and critical should be good to go as well I suppose. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100514/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100514 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
