On May 4, 2012, at 10:21 AM, Matthieu Monrocq wrote: > > 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 > > > One minor nit: I can certainly understand reusing the lexer/preprocessor if > it is nearly identical and the tooling mechanism just added by Manuel because > it's a great infrastructure, however on the other hand I am not sure about > the driver itself... > > I don't know Fortran, so perhaps it's obvious to you Hal, but I wonder if > perhaps it would make sense to produce a different binary, with its own set > of flags ?
Yeah, reusing the driver doesn't seem obvious to me either. -Chris
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
