-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
Llvm16 pr #23
base: www
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Llvm16 pr #23
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for dreamy-capybara-6a89db ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
@@ -64,12 +64,17 @@ entry: | |||
... | |||
``` | |||
|
|||
## Performing AD Enzyme | |||
## Performing AD Enzyme (the gory details) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe internals? Or on the inside
@@ -64,12 +64,17 @@ entry: | |||
... | |||
``` | |||
|
|||
## Performing AD Enzyme | |||
## Performing AD Enzyme (internal details) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
perhaps call it LLVM-native
rather than internal defaults?
@@ -138,12 +143,29 @@ For ease, we could combine the final optimization and bianry execution into one | |||
clang output.ll -O3 -o a.exe | |||
``` | |||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe call this C++ native?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, with some minor wording changes
Updating the docs augmenting (rather than replacing) the examples for LLVM16+ as discussed at EnzymeAD/Enzyme#1462
Note that the version of Enzyme that I am using, namely
dc1c2696
(a few commits afterv0.0.86
) does not appear to be supporting theCache behavior
options so I have not updated that section and I have left a comment about it in the title (perhaps not clearest, please improve that part --as any other-- as you see fit)