3 ms·
Thanks for the feedback, we will look into it. :P I'm happy to pass these along to Dan and your comment is easy for me to link to, but I don't know why you're
by ndesaulniers 7y ago
Thanks for the feedback, we will look into it. :P
I'm happy to pass these along to Dan and your comment is easy for me to link to, but I don't know why you're suggesting Google move LLVM compiler engineers to work on NDK, which is more of a userspace C++ framework for third party applications to interface with the Android platform. Kind of feels orthogonal to this thread which is about the llvm 9.0 release.
> fix the regressions regarding missing GCC features in clang (Android NDK tracker used to have a couple of them listed).
Now that sounds more like work for Android LLVM engineers, but it sounds like the list is removed? Could you elaborate and point me to some? (Assume anything you claim in a response I'll just ask for a link)
* EDIT * (it seems I can't reply further)
Thanks for the links. I'll pass on both links as feedback and follow up on the state of those two LLVM reported regressions.
- pjmlp 7y agoI am suggesting that, because as I mentioned it looks understaffed from the outside, either that or there isn't that much willingness to spend resources on improving it beyond "good enough". Given that you mentioned, that there were actually so many LLVM engineers around, I thought they could give them an hand. :) Regarding the clang regressations: https://github.com/android/ndk/issues/742 https://github.com/android/ndk/issues/742 https://github.com/android/ndk/issues/721 https://github.com/android/ndk/issues/721 There are way less than I remembered though, sorry for the confusion.