pcc wrote:

I think the plan that you've laid out (create an interim `__gnu_cxx::hash_*` 
implementation with no dependencies on libc++ internals, and then remove it) 
makes sense and is the right direction for upstream libc++. Downstreams would 
have the option of either taking the no-dependency `__gnu_cxx::hash_*` 
implementation or (if they don't care about ABI) writing their own 
implementation.

I spoke to some folks here and I learned of a plan to do the latter (which 
works for us, as we don't care about ABI). A suitable no-dependency  
`__gnu_cxx::hash_*` implementation would provide another option in case the 
wrapper is not ready by the time upstream is ready to remove it.

So in short I think we'd be fine with your proposed plan for upstream.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/183223
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits

Reply via email to