Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 13:41:13 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r222183 - head/lib/clang Message-ID: <4DD974E9.8040000@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20110522202256.GA43412@freebsd.org> References: <201105221632.p4MGWjUb081825@svn.freebsd.org> <20110522202256.GA43412@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/22/2011 13:22, Roman Divacky wrote: > The problem here is deeper in my opinion. What FreeBSD calls > amd64 the rest of the world (ie. linux) calls x86_64, I think > that instead of this we should teach llvm/clang about "amd64". > Maybe as a FreeBSD-only diff. Can we please not go down that route with clang? It was a mistake to add a bunch of FreeBSD'isms to gcc because it made it that much harder for both the code and the compiler to be modular. We have a chance to atone for these mistakes while introducing a new compiler, can we please not make them again? Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4DD974E9.8040000>