arichardson added a comment. In D138296#3937599 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D138296#3937599>, @rjmccall wrote:
> In D138296#3937486 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D138296#3937486>, @arichardson > wrote: > >> In D138296#3937224 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D138296#3937224>, @eandrews >> wrote: >> >>> Functionally this looks ok to me. However I am not sure if CodeGenTypes is >>> the 'right' place for this function to live, considering that other >>> functions with similar functionality are in ASTContext - including >>> overloads of getTargetAddressSpace( ). @erichkeane @aaron.ballman could you >>> please take a look? >> >> My view is that the parts that interact with LLVM IR should really live in >> CodeGen/ and not Basic/ or AST/. I will see how difficult it would be to >> move the remaining target (LLVM IR) address space handling code to CodeGen/ > > Yeah, I don't think there's a good reason for some of the address-space stuff > that currently lives in Basic to be there instead of in CodeGen. Basic/AST > need to understand what address spaces exist, their sizes, and what > relationships they have with each other, and that's it. Thanks for looking at this - does this mean you are happy for me to commit this change? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D138296/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D138296 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
