On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Sean Silva <[email protected]> wrote: > >> as we get compelling use cases, we bring up the necessary headers into >> include/ to satisfy them, making any necessary incremental changes to >> better serve the use case. > > > Yes, but that's exactly what we're lacking here: a compelling use case > that outlines what API it actually needs in the public headers. > Totally agreed. Digging a bit, it seems like quite a bit got laid out by the OP in the thread "[cfe-dev] Clang ABI library". However, there hasn't been a clear connection drawn between the code changes in this patch and the use cases in that thread. DeadMG, maybe you could start a new thread with a more incremental, more clearly motivated step attacking a limited subset of your use case, rather than your current approach of "These are just the headers I found myself to have used so far when grepping my codebase"? -- Sean Silva
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
