Describes how to run the Fortran LLVM Test Suite, specifically the external SPEC CPU 2017 Fortran tests.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
Thanks for writing this! I left a lot of comments, but most of them are just typos / nitpicks, otherwise it looks good :)
flang/docs/FortranLLVMTestSuite.md | ||
---|---|---|
10 | Typo: seperate -> separate | |
13 | Nitpick: You can skip the second "describes". | |
15 | This looks like the kind of sentence that's likely to get outdated and confuse people when flang does become capable of generating code. Do we have a better place to put this info? I don't remember if there's any "Current status" document that's constantly updated for flang. | |
17 | Do we have or plan to have a buildbot doing this? | |
21 | Nitpick: I think the other LLVM docs tend to use "test-suite" rather than "TestSuite" or "Test Suite", would be nice to be consistent. | |
32 | Nitpick: I think "shortcoming" is a single word. | |
35 | Typo: the the -> the | |
43 | Typo: strong -> strongly | |
46 | Typo: requires -> require |
- Fix typos and other grammatical issues.
flang/docs/FortranLLVMTestSuite.md | ||
---|---|---|
15 | I think that's a good point. Yes, we mention the current status here: However, I think it would be good to keep this sentence because it adds a bit of context. One might wonder why write a Fortran Test Suite, if there is no compiler driver able to generate code. Just my opinion. I do need to create a mental note to update this page once Flang can generate code and this version of Flang is upstreamed. | |
17 | A buildbot with GFortran or a buildbot with the throw away driver? I am not sure that setting up a buildbot with GFortran would be appropriate unless there is precedent for it elsewhere in the project. It might be worth it for the throw away driver, but I would want one of the higher ups to chime in. |
Typo: seperate -> separate