On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 18:45, Sebastian Pop <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 18:00, Tobias Grosser <tob...@grosser.es> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I propose to switch to the official cloog.org cloog version with isl backend >> and >> at the same time to remove support for both CLooG-PPL legacy as well as >> CLooG-Parma. >> > > Many thanks for implementing this cleanup. > >> We want to switch to cloog-isl as it is the only officially maintained >> version >> of cloog. Furthermore, it provides features that will help to fix some bugs >> in >> the graphite code generation[1]. >> The reason to abond CLooG-PPL (legacy version) is, that cloog-isl provides >> the >> new CloogInput library interface. This interface is not available the old >> CLooG. >> I plan to move graphite to this interface. As I do not see enough benefits >> from >> being able to use CLooG PPL, I decided to not introduce any compatibility >> scheme, but just remove any code that is only needed for CLooG-PPL. >> I also removed CLooG-Parma (cloog.org with PPL backend), as it is currently >> not >> actively maintained and not well tested. I believe our time is better spent >> on >> improving graphite or cloog isl, as in putting time into this cloog version. >> >> So here we are: Moving graphite back to the official cloog.org version! >> >> Passes 'make check RUNTESTFLAGS=graphite.exp' as well as a bootstrap on Linux >> amd64. >> >> Cheers >> Tobi >> >> P.S.: Why do we move to the super latest one. Because we expect that most >> users >> would need an update, and, as we will soon use some of the newer features, >> there >> is no need to force another update later. >> >> >> Tobias Grosser (3): >> Make CLooG isl the only supported CLooG version. >> Require cloog 0.16.3 >> Remove code that supported legacy CLooG. > > For all your changes, you would need the ok from a configure maintainer.
Ping maintainers of the "build machinery (*.in)". Thanks, Sebastian > The changes to the graphite framework are ok. > > Thanks, > Sebastian >
