ergawy wrote: > It is slightly unfortunate to rediscover the loops so early in the flow when > we had it in source.
Totally agree, it should be more trivial than this. And it actually was slight worse, see: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114020. > Have you considered changing the representation of do_concurrent in the IR > for multi-range do concurrent loops? I am all for it. I can add that to the future work part of the document and look into it once we have a more fleshed out pass. The nest detection algorithm is luckily not that complicated and helps us move forward with a working implementation faster. WDYT? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127595 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
