This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFC: Update ISL under gcc/infrastructure/ ? // Remove CLooG?


> CLooG is not necessarily needed. You can run graphite just with ISL. The
> main reason that ISL code generation is not enabled by default is that we
> did not yet get extensive testing and it was unclear who will have the time
> to fix possible bugs.

Could you please advise me which test suites should be used to make
performance comparison between CLooG and ISL generator? (I would like
to do this, even though the old generator is removed).

> @Mircae, Roman: Would you have time to help with bug-fixing if we do the
> switch now? (I am happy to review patches and give advice, but can not do
> the full move myself)

I could find time for this. What do you mean by âswitchâ? If Iâm not
mistaken, ISL generator is already used by default. Should we remove
support of CLooG generator and all files related to it?


-- 
                                    Cheers, Roman Gareev.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]