On Oct 29, 2012, at 1:21 PM, Eric Christopher <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Quentin Colombet <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Oct 24, 2012, at 9:25 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Quentin Colombet <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Following the adding of the new ForceSizeOpt attribute in LLVM (see commit >>>> r1664220), I am making a patch for clang to set this attribute on each >>>> function when the Oz optimization level is set. >>> >>> Can you fix the attribute based on the code review feedback first? I'd >>> rather not start generating the IR when it's about to change. >> >> Hi Chandler, >> >> I am not sure to know which review you are talking about. >> From my understanding, according to Eli, it was ok, and according to Evan, >> it was ok too but may change in the future. >> I was not making the future happening now, if it was that you meant :). >> > > This is what he meant, what's the point of doing this as a short term > fix when the full fix is both a) not much more work and b) there are > objections to the existing patch? It's not a lot of work except for getting agreement. There is no urgency to make the change to -Os[123] now, there are no driving forces behind it. I'd recommend punting it. As for the attribute name, I have no strong opinions. It's a obviously open to interpretation. Evan > > You put a patch up for review and then didn't respond to the review > before you committed it. > > -eric _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
