Felipe Lessa wrote:
I glanced over your patch and it seems you have broken LLVM's backend. I'm not a LLVM expert by no means, but if GHC's needs were implemented as a subtarget, wouldn't there be the possibility of upstream LLVM accepting the patch? If the patch didn't break the rest of LLVM then at least it should be possible for the same patched LLVM be used by GHC and e.g. clang.
Yeah sorry, should have included this in issues but I just forgot all about it. The LLVM patch defiantly need to be changed so that it doesn't break other llvm users like clang. As for if LLVM would accept these patches? Hard to say, I've had a draft email sitting around for a while now asking them this question but never finished it off as I wanted to gain a clearer idea of how I would need to change my patch before sending it. I'll try to look into it this weekend if time permits and send that email finally.
A 2.7 release of LLVM is happening soon with the code freeze scheduled for March 7th, so the earliest any changes needed for GHC would be included would be 2.8, which should be around the end of October 2010 (LLVM has 6 month releases).
_______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list Cvs-ghc@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
