Added details about the llvm/example section.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Unit Tests
Time | Test | |
---|---|---|
760 ms | x64 windows > lld.MachO::reproduce.s |
Event Timeline
Minor optional suggestions, but LGTM to me too.
@xgupta - I suggest avoiding both LGTMing and asking for another reviewer. Given LLVM is a single accept culture, this can be really confusing to new contributors. I suggest wording along the lines of "This seems good to me, but I'd like a second opinion before LGTMing. Maybe X and Y can confirm?" Alternatively, you could simply LGTM if you were comfortable with that. Another phrasing might be "LGTM, but please wait N days before submitting in case X or Y have additional comments".
llvm/docs/GettingStarted.rst | ||
---|---|---|
820–834 | The last part of this sentence gets a bit complicated, can I suggest: Some simple examples showing how to use LLVM as a compiler for a custom language - including lowering, optimization, and code generation. | |
826 | Maybe replace "both static and JIT" with " both static (ahead of time) and various approaches to Just In Time (JIT) compilation." |
Yes @reames, I agree, I will remember your suggestion from next time. I was just a little afraid that I am also not very experienced so giving only my acceptance to commit changes is a little risky(IMO). If next time I have confusion I only add an appropriate reviewer for that patch.
( Additional context here is that @pooja2299 is an Outreachy applicant and I am co-mentor for one project, so she adds me on every review so I will aware of her progress but I may not be the perfect reviewer for every patch)
Ah, sorry, I'm so used to LLVM phrasing that I forgot "LGTM w/minor optional comments" isn't widely understood. For us, that generally means you can land with the changes made (if you decide to) without further review.
Maybe replace "both static and JIT" with " both static (ahead of time) and various approaches to Just In Time (JIT) compilation."