On May 4, 2012, at 4:27 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: >> >> FWIW, I don't think that this makes sense from a community standpoint. >> >> If you're serious about building a fortran frontend (which would be >> really really cool). I think we should start it as another LLVM >> subproject. It can certainly build off and use the Clang "liblex" to >> get the preprocessor etc, and taking changes to support Fortran into >> the clang tree would be perfectly fine. > > Alright cool, let's do that then. Based on the feedback I've received, > it seems like it makes the most sense to add Fortran support directly > into the driver and lexer, and keep everything else as a separate > subproject. This subproject will have its own Parser, Sema, AST, > CodeGen, etc. subdirectories.
Sounds good to me. > If we set this up kind of like clang is > setup, then the build system will detect whether there is a fortran > subdirectory in clang, and if so, will build (defining > CLANG_HAS_FORTRAN or something like that) and link the extra components. Should "flang" (please come up with a better name! :) be in llvm/tools/flang or in llvm/tools/clang/flang? I think that the former makes more sense. These are peer projects, even if one is dependent on the other. -Chris _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
