scott.smith added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743793, @zturner wrote:
> Not to sound like a broken record, but please try to put this in LLVM instead > of LLVM. I suggested a convenient function signature earlier. @zturner ok to commit? TaskMapOverInt(x, y, fn) maps directly to parallel_for(0, x, fn). Rather than rebundle the change you have for lldb, only for it to be deleted once you get it into llvm, can we just commit this as a stopgap? It is a step in the right direction as it removes TaskRunner and puts us on an API more likely to end up in LLVM. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
