LLVM Version 18-0 is misleading

[WolverinDEV]

Hey ho,
I'm not sure if this is wanted or more an oversight, but naming the feature for LLVM 18-0 when actually referring to LLVM 18-1 seems misleading. Perhaps the feature should be named 18-1?

[jamesmth]

It's an oversight on my part, I simply mirrored the feature naming scheme of inkwell, since the feature llvm18-0 activates inkwell/llvm18-0-no-llvm-linking under the hood.

Out of curiosity, is there a specific C-API (LLVM) called by llvm-plugin which is not available in LLVM 18-0?

[WolverinDEV]

Yes, I noticed inwells naming schema afterwards as well.
I'm not sure if that is intentional or what's the reasoning behind it.

Afaik there is no LLVM 18.0 version. I do not know the reason tough.
I just stumbled across this little issue when trying to match LLVM versions to my Rust compiler version.

PS: I do not have prior experience in the field of the LLVM C APIs so may just that be the reason.

[jamesmth]

Well, if there is no LLVM 18.0, I'll rename the feature to llvm18-1 (it looks like LLVM maintainers skipped 19.0 as well 😄)