kiranchandramohan wrote:
> > Also, I don't have a very strong opinion about this, but it seems > > misleading to have the `DoConcurrentConversionToOpenMP.md` document be > > written as if all of the features in the ROCm fork were already present, > > with the last section only implying that not everything that was presented > > is already there. It seems to me that it would make more sense that this > > document was updated with what's introduced by each patch, so it's easier > > to review together with the features as they come. > > +1. I agree with @skatrak here. I would also request the same unless it is > too onerous. An alternative would be to submit the document as a separate design patch. And then in each subsequent patch update the status of the implementation. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126026 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
