Re-ping... I think the patch is good, if not pretty, so I'd like to commit. Can anyone comment on whether the tests are enough to guarantee preservation of the existing Darwin behaviour?
Thanks, Bernie > -----Original Message----- > From: Bernie Ogden [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 04 December 2013 10:36 > To: Renato Golin; Jim Grosbach > Cc: [email protected]; > [email protected]; Amara Emerson; Eric Christopher > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Refactor duplicate functions > > Ping > > Am I OK to go ahead with this patch? As Renato says 'Mainly that boils > down to: are the added Darwin tests enough to guarantee compatibility?' > > Thanks, > > Bernie > > > From: Renato Golin [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 23 November 2013 12:34 > To: Jim Grosbach > Cc: Bernard Ogden; reviews+D2243+public+6ca39a6218cf2957@llvm- > reviews.chandlerc.com; [email protected]; Amara Emerson; Eric > Christopher > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refactor duplicate functions > > On 22 November 2013 23:35, Jim Grosbach <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah. It's a long road, and also raises the typical questions of just > how much GCC command line compatibility is worth, etc.. > > Indeed, but we digressed. ;) > > Is the current patch conforming to Darwin usage of arch/march/mcpu? > Mainly that boils down to: are the added Darwin tests enough to > guarantee compatibility? > > cheers, > --renato _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
