Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Replace deprecated LLVM functions. #20

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

redstar
Copy link
Member

@redstar redstar commented Nov 12, 2011

Several functions regarding file handling are deprecated. This pull request replaces these functions with the new one from llvm::sys::fs and llvm::sys::path.

Please note that the call of llvm::sys::fs::exists() can be further simplified with the use of LLVM 3.0.

Several functions regarding file handling are deprecated. This commit replaces these functions with the new one from llvm::sys::fs and llvm::sys::path.
@dnadlinger
Copy link
Member

Is there any benefit to merging this now? I'd rather wait a few days until LLVM 3.0 is out (and we have switched to it, but that should happen soon, as we are currently hitting a 2.9 regalloc bug on OS X), and then directly switch to the new, less messy, APIs.

@redstar
Copy link
Member Author

redstar commented Nov 12, 2011

Well, it is just a spin-off product of digging into LDC. No need to merge now...

@bioinfornatics
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks a lot redstar
you are welcome

@redstar
Copy link
Member Author

redstar commented Nov 16, 2011

Ok, I got a LDC2 from the llvm3.0 branch. I redo the pull request for this branch soon.

@redstar redstar closed this Nov 16, 2011
@dnadlinger
Copy link
Member

@redstar: That would be great (by the way, I hope my previous message didn't come off as rebuffing) – LLVM is going to be released on November 30th (actually, it should have been out in this week, but there were some last-minute issues and it collided with the LLVM conference). I'm currently preparing the DMD 2.056/LLVM 3.0 merge, and even just for eliminating the build warnings, it would be great to have this in.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants